Stephen Finucane <step...@that.guru> writes: > On Thu, 2017-11-16 at 21:02 +1100, Daniel Axtens wrote: >> Hi Stephen, >> >> > This is a sizable, albeit mostly trivial series focused on (a) >> > adding support >> > for Django 1.11 to Patchwork. Previously this also contained a >> > series of >> > patches aimed at resolving all 'DeprecationWarning's for the >> > versions of Django >> > that we support, but these have since been merged separately. >> >> The series, with the modifications in my other emails, is: >> Tested-by: Daniel Axtens <d...@axtens.net> > > Thanks for the reviews, Daniel. This is all merged now.
Fantastic, thanks. > >> I haven't specifically examined the patches to the level I'm >> comfortable with giving them Reviews, but I am confident that they >> work. >> >> Earlier you talked about a performance regression with 1.11 - did you >> ever find out anything about that? I have been looking at doing a >> proper performance test suite, but haven't been able to carve out a >> chunk of time to do it... > > Aye, this was the issue I pointed out with the '/api/events' endpoint. > As you've noted, this is unrelated to Django 1.11 and has to be > resolved separately (I'm working on it). I have made some (so far incomplete) attempts centering around denormalising the project field - moving it either completely out of submission and into patch/coverletter/comment or just duplicating it in those three models. This also fixes the fact that we need a SQL join just to enumerate patches which is slow (and an OzLabs pain point) - but the migrations are a paaaaaiiiiiin. Is that your approach or do you have other ideas? Regards, Daniel > > Stephen _______________________________________________ Patchwork mailing list Patchwork@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/patchwork
