Code review comment for lp:~iffy/storm/lazycolumns

Thanks a lot for pushing this forward.

Given the question on how the syntax should look like, I'm concerned the
spirit described in the notes isn't being implemented. It doesn't seem
practical to define per field granularity for what should be loaded.

I'll have a look at the branch, hopefully next week.
On Jan 3, 2012 2:33 PM, "Matt Haggard" <email address hidden> wrote:

> Rob,
>
> I know what you mean. I'm working on this to fix a problem we currently
> have with a big table (126 fields). 90% of the time, we need about 4
> fields; 10% of the time we need some combination of the others.
>
> My current patch allows you to define column laziness globally, which
> improves 90% of our code. What you're suggesting is that in addition to
> (instead of?) defining laziness globally, you can override laziness when
> using a store.find, store.get, Reference or ReferenceSet? This would allow
> one to avoid double queries for the other 10%.
>
> What would the syntax look like?
>
> store.find(Foo, eager=(Foo.name, Foo.kind))
> bar = Reference(bar_id, 'Bar.id', eager=('Bar.name', 'Bar.kind'))
>
> Or would you do some kind of state thing (this tastes bad)?
>
> Bar.eagers.push('name', 'kind')
> store.find(Bar)
> Bar.eagers.pop()
>
> Maybe this is better:
>
> store.eager_load(Bar.name, Bar.kind)
> store.find(Bar)
> ...
> store.lazy_load(Bar.name, Bar.kind)
>
> Also, is laziness overriding (your suggestion) something that should be
> built in from the beginning, or can it be added as a new feature after
> global laziness (my patch) is added? Maybe the answer depends on the
> implementation.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Matt
> --
> https://code.launchpad.net/~magmatt/storm/lazycolumns/+merge/87092
> You are subscribed to branch lp:storm.
>