On 6/3/08, Loui <louipc.ist@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, 3 Jun 2008 20:25:33 +0200 Sylvester Johansson <syljo361@gmail.com> wrote:
Hey Sylvester. I think I like this method better than the other. Could you fix the indentation (especially in function query), put a more descriptive commit message, and resubmit? Thanks.
I already outlined on the bugtracker why I thought this wasn't exactly a great idea, as it was implemented. oh well.
This is a different implementation than the one discussed on the bugtracker. The difference is that with this, you can specify on the client-side what fields the json result should contain, while the other was set server-side. There is no sql joins going on, so it would be a
On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 2:14 AM, eliott <eliott@cactuswax.net> wrote: performance increase due to the fact that currently the rpc clients have to do N+1 databasel queries, where N is the number of hits on the initial search. This cuts it down the number of queries to one.