On Monday, September 19, 2016 at 12:24:07 PM UTC-7, Chris Hanks wrote:
>
> Hello -
>
> I'm using the null_dataset extension, which mentions a performance issue 
> due to the use of Object#extend. It seems to me that we could get the same 
> behavior simply by having nullify clone the ds with a "nullified" (or 
> similar) dataset option, and the methods being overridden in that model 
> would simply check for the presence of that key and call super if it 
> doesn't exist. I expect this would be faster, though I haven't benchmarked 
> it, and it seems more in keeping with the design of the rest of Sequel.
>
> Does this seem like a reasonable goal? I'd be happy to work up a PR for it 
> if it sounds acceptable.
>

I'm not opposed to this if it can be shown to be a significant performance 
issue on either ruby 2.3.1 and/or jruby 9.  I know it was a problem in 
older ruby versions, but I'm not sure if it's still a significant 
performance issue.  We may just be able to drop that line from the 
extension rdoc.

Be sure to include both your benchmark code and the benchmark results when 
submitting your pull request.  Make sure the benchmark also includes the 
case where nullify is not called, so we can compare what the effect of such 
a change would be on code using the null_dataset extension without calling 
nullify.

Thanks,
Jeremy

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sequel-talk" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to sequel-talk+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sequel-talk@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sequel-talk.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to