JSONAPI-Resources / JSONAPI-Resources/jsonapi-resources
Alternative to ActiveRelationResource which does not produce extra DB queries
Dieses Issue hat noch niemand übernommen.
- Vorherrschende Sprache
- Ruby
- Sterne
- 2.3k
- Forks
- 546
- PR-Merge-Kennzahlen
- Keine gemergten PRs in 30 T.
Beschreibung
This issue is a (choose one):
- Problem/bug report.
- Feature request.
- Request for support. Note: Please try to avoid submitting issues for support requests. Use Gitter instead.
Checklist before submitting:
- I've searched for an existing issue.
- I've asked my question on Gitter and have not received a satisfactory answer.
- I've included a complete bug report template. This step helps us and allows us to see the bug without trying to reproduce the problem from your description. It helps you because you will frequently detect if it's a problem specific to your project.
- The feature I'm asking for is compliant with the JSON:API spec.
Description
One thing that changed significantly in 0.10 is the introduction of ActiveRelationResource, which seems to be a nice optimization to have when caching is utilized. But when caching is not turned on it actually doubles the amount of DB queries needed to process a request. For example, typical request with include would look something like this in the log on 0.10.x:
DEBUG -- : (0.0ms) SELECT "users"."id" AS "users_id", "users"."id" FROM "users" ORDER BY users.id asc LIMIT ? OFFSET ? [["LIMIT", 10], ["OFFSET", 0]]
DEBUG -- : (0.1ms) SELECT DISTINCT users.id AS "source_id", "profiles"."id" AS "profiles_id", "profiles"."id" FROM "users" INNER JOIN "profiles" ON "profiles"."user_id" = "users"."id" WHERE "users"."id" IN (?, ?, ?) ORDER BY profiles.id asc [["id", 1], ["id", 2], ["id", 3]]
DEBUG -- : (0.0ms) SELECT DISTINCT users.id AS "source_id", "posts"."id" AS "posts_id", "posts"."id" FROM "users" INNER JOIN "posts" ON "posts"."user_id" = "users"."id" WHERE "users"."id" IN (?, ?, ?) ORDER BY posts.id asc [["id", 1], ["id", 2], ["id", 3]]
DEBUG -- : User Load (0.0ms) SELECT "users".* FROM "users" WHERE "users"."id" IN (?, ?, ?) [["id", 1], ["id", 2], ["id", 3]]
DEBUG -- : Profile Load (0.0ms) SELECT "profiles".* FROM "profiles" WHERE "profiles"."id" IN (?, ?, ?) [["id", 1], ["id", 2], ["id", 3]]
DEBUG -- : Post Load (0.0ms) SELECT "posts".* FROM "posts" WHERE "posts"."id" IN (?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?) [["id", 1], ["id", 2], ["id", 3], ["id", 4], ["id", 5], ["id", 6], ["id", 7], ["id", 8], ["id", 9]]
DEBUG -- : (0.0ms) SELECT COUNT(*) FROM "users"
Compare to the same request on 0.9:
DEBUG -- : User Load (0.0ms) SELECT "users".* FROM "users" ORDER BY "users"."id" ASC LIMIT ? OFFSET ? [["LIMIT", 10], ["OFFSET", 0]]
DEBUG -- : Profile Load (0.1ms) SELECT "profiles".* FROM "profiles" WHERE "profiles"."user_id" IN (?, ?, ?) [["user_id", 1], ["user_id", 2], ["user_id", 3]]
DEBUG -- : Post Load (0.0ms) SELECT "posts".* FROM "posts" WHERE "posts"."user_id" IN (?, ?, ?) [["user_id", 1], ["user_id", 2], ["user_id", 3]]
DEBUG -- : (0.0ms) SELECT COUNT(*) FROM "users"
Is there a plan to optimize non-cached scenario? Like having an alternative base resource that I'd behave more or less like 0.9 behaved? Thanks.
Beitragsleitfaden
Für dieses Repository ist kein Beitragsleitfaden indexiert
Erste Schritte
- Lies das ganze Issue und danach den Beitragsleitfaden des Projekts.
- Schreib ins Issue, dass du es übernimmst — das erspart doppelte Arbeit.
- Forke das Repository und arbeite in einem Branch.
- Öffne einen Pull Request, der die Issue-Nummer nennt.
Rechercherichtung
Beginne damit, den nicht zwischengespeicherten Pfad von ActiveRelationResource für Anfragen mit include nachzuverfolgen und ihn mit den hier gezeigten Abfrageprotokollen von 0.9 und 0.10 zu vergleichen. Fertig ist die Arbeit, wenn eine Alternative oder Optimierung die zusätzlichen Relations- und id-Abfragen ohne Caching vermeidet und dabei die enthaltenen Datensätze und das Verhalten der Paginierung beibehält.
Vom Indexierungsmodell aus dem Issue-Text verfasst.
Bewertung
- Tech-Stack
- rails, ruby
- Bereich
- database, performance
- Issue-Typ
- Feature
- Schwierigkeit
- 5/5
- Geschätzter Aufwand
- Über eine Woche
- Aktivitätsstatus
- Veraltet
- Klarheit
- Größtenteils klar
- Anfängerfreundlichkeit
- 35/100