please do remember that most of the speedup between rdbms and nosql (yes,
I'm over-generalizing, but I'm going to state a simple core-concept) is due
to the lack of features like this.
While a mongodb for storing incremental updates is probably a better tool
for the job, it's not for complex relations handling (you have to code your
own).
On Wednesday, April 10, 2013 3:24:33 PM UTC+2, Alan Etkin wrote:
>
> > - membership
> > - permission
> > - end table
>
> > with the everybody_group_id logic, probably other 2 queries.
>
> Now I understand why there's no accessible_query for NoSQL, not even in
> the roadmap. No user would accept making 4 or 5 db queries for filtering
> rows in a single request. This may work in a prototype with a couple of
> records, but would take a lot of resources with thousands of records in
> production.
> I guess the only alternative is writing rbac data on each record with an
> optional field factory when creating auth (for an implementation in the
> Auth class), but It is a partial solution. It would not solve handling
> custom rights because, AFAIK, you would need one field for each permission
> type ("read", "update", "custom", ...) and also it seems a lot stuff for
> implementing a single rbac feature.
>
--
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"web2py-users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
