Wouldn't that make it non portable to other db's?
mic
2012/6/5 Bruno Rocha <rochacbr...@gmail.com>:
> Cant we have a custom field for this?
>
> Field.PostgresIntegerList("name")
>
> http://zerp.ly/rochacbruno
>
> Em 02/06/2012 00:26, "Massimo Di Pierro" <massimo.dipie...@gmail.com>
> escreveu:
>
>> The search by content should be faster using native postgresql array type.
>> Everything else should be the same. We could change it and should be easy.
>> The problem is backward compatibility. I need to give some thought about
>> this. Please open a ticket to google code.
>>
>> On Friday, 1 June 2012 16:49:39 UTC-5, Lewis wrote:
>>>
>>> By any chance is the DAL list:integer type implemented as a postgresql
>>> array? The web2py book would say no--the list:integer is a big text field
>>> as '1 | 2 | 3', etc.
>>>
>>> Could it be implemented using postgresql's native array types in the DAL
>>> driver for postgresql? I'd assume that optimized db query code would be
>>> rather faster than parsing a big text field in python code.
>>>
>>> How could I code a model with a FIELD function that referred to a
>>> postgresql array field ('CREATE TABLE foo (favorites integer[], more
>>> fields...);') that I created outside of the DAL? I am thinking this is not
>>> possible as the DAL types could not map to this postgresql type to express
>>> queries and handle results.
>>>
>>> Assuming I end up using Field('favorites', 'list:integer') what are the
>>> performance implications?
>>>
>>> My usage is that each user can have favorites, which will simply be the
>>> numeric key of the favorite item. A favorites table would have three
>>> fields: id (as key), user (refer to auth.user.id), favorites (a list or
>>> array of integers).
>>>
>>> Thanks for any suggestions/comments.
>>>
>>> - Lewis
