perf(core): Improved performance of validateVariantOptionIds #337
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
These changes reduce the amount of data loaded into memory which hopefully prevents some server crashes. #328. Also added the eager option for allowing performance gains in certain queries.
|
Looks good - the |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This pull request tries to implement the idea mentioned in #328 (comment).
Step one and two are done at the same time as before as one is required to do the join anyway.
I wasn't able to think of a case where performing the two steps separately would require less memory but I might be missing something.
In addition to the ideas mention I added the eager option to getEntityOrThrow to further decrease the memory required. Is this okay or should this parameter be implemented differently / i.e. a separate function be added with this functionality?