On Nov 30, 2007, at 10:58 AM, Timo Nentwig wrote:
On Friday 30 November 2007 12:59:13 Grant Ingersoll wrote:
Hmmm, I think you should be able to rely on the fact that Fields are
stored in order of indexing and then read back in that same order.
Yeah, tought about that for a moment but this is just way to fragile.
I can understand your hesitation, but good documentation of what you
are doing and lots of comments should help :-)
Otherwise, the reading twice approach makes sense.
Yes, it makes sense the question is whether it performs. The sense
of a
FieldSelector as I understand it is to save disk IO (ans maybe also
save a
couple of bytes RAM...).
I guess the question becomes what is the nature of your fields? Do
you have some really large fields that you want to avoid loading b/c
they are not shown initially? That is the main use case, I guess.
Have you actually done some profiling to see that you are hitting a
bottleneck?
I wouldn't recommend it, but if it was really important to you, you
could modify FieldsReader to be more intelligent about your fields,
but again this would be fragile, too.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
