On 05/06/11 07:40 -0700, reichlich wrote: > > > On 4 Jun., 23:20, Cédric Krier <[email protected]> wrote: > > Interesting. > > > > I think as the design is complex a small doc entry about it will be great. > > Also as it is not trivial algorithm you should write tests (like for > > recursion > > etc.) > > > > I see you use executemany instead of the standard way. I suppose it is for > > performance but I'm not sure it is a good design choice because you > > duplicate > > a lot of stuffs (like value formating), you lost the abilities of writing > > Function fields. > > Hi, > > Function fields and default values are not implemented yet in > create_many. > But the use of prepared statements was a good performance boost, even > if the > function field and default value handling is added.
Perhaps but you lost a lot of functionnalities like clearing the caches if necessary, trigger activation, values validation etc. -- Cédric Krier B2CK SPRL Rue de Rotterdam, 4 4000 Liège Belgium Tel: +32 472 54 46 59 Email/Jabber: [email protected] Website: http://www.b2ck.com/
pgpQxLixJXj7T.pgp
Description: PGP signature
