let us see it!
On Aug 9, 9:36 pm, Michael Toomim <too...@gmail.com> wrote: > Result: Fixed by upgrading. I was seeing this > bug:http://code.google.com/p/web2py/issues/detail?id=345 > > However, virtualfields still take more time than they should. My > selects take 2-3x longer with virtualfields enabled than without. I > implemented a little hack in the dal that adds methods to rows with > only a 10% overhead (instead of 200-300%) and can share that if > anyone's interested. > > On Aug 8, 8:38 pm, Michael Toomim <too...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > It turns out the speed problem is REALLY bad. I have a table with > > virtualfields of 14,000 rows. When I run raw sql: > > > a = db.executesql('select * from people;') > > > ...the query returns in 121ms. But when I run it through the DAL on > > only a subset of the data: > > > a = db(db.people.id > 0).select(limitby=(0,1000)) > > > ...it returns in 141096.431ms. That's... 141 seconds. So 1000x longer > > on .1 of the database. > > > My virtualfields are all lazy functions. I'm looking into what's > > causing it and will report back when I find out. It seems it might > > have something to do with the lazy decorator func because when I hit C- > > c the code is often stuck there... inside import copy or something. > > > def lazy(f): > > def g(self,f=f): > > import copy > > self=copy.copy(self) > > return lambda *a,**b: f(self,*a,**b) > > return g > > > Anyway, I'll send an update when I have more info. > > > On Aug 2, 3:03 pm, MichaelToomim<too...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > That's way better syntax! Great idea! > > > > On Aug 2, 2011, at 2:31 AM, Massimo Di Pierro wrote: > > > > > We need to work on the speed. This can perhaps help the syntax: > > > > > db=DAL() > > > > db.define_table('a',Field('b','integer')) > > > > for i in range(10): > > > > db.a.insert(b=i) > > > > > def lazy(f): > > > > def g(self,f=f): > > > > import copy > > > > self=copy.copy(self) > > > > return lambda *a,**b: f(self,*a,**b) > > > > return g > > > > > class Scale: > > > > @lazy > > > > def c(self,scale=1): > > > > return self.a.b*scale > > > > > db.a.virtualfields.append(Scale()) > > > > for row in db(db.a).select(): > > > > print row.b, row.c(1), row.c(2), row.c(3) > > > > > On Aug 1, 3:10 pm, MichaelToomim<too...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> Maybe it helps for me to explain my use-case. I mainly use virtual > > > >> fields as lazy methods, to help traverse related tables. I was > > > >> actually surprised that lazy evaluation wasn't the default. I noticed > > > >> a few implications of this: > > > >> - Large queries are slowed byvirtualfields, even if they won't be > > > >> needed, esp if they query db > > > >> - My definitions forvirtualfieldsaren't as clean as they could be, > > > >> because I have many nested "lazy" funcs in the class definition > > > >> - We can't serialize all objects intosessionvariables > > > > >> So really I'm just using this because it's a nicer notation to call > > > >> row.otherthing() instead of getotherthing(row). Maybe I really want > > > >> some different feature here? > > > > >> On Aug 1, 2011, at 5:40 AM, Anthony Bastardi wrote: > > > > >>> Note, after looking at this some more, Massimo recalled that the > > > >>> reason auth_user virtual fields were excluded from auth.user (and > > > >>> therefore from saving in thesession) is because some virtual fields > > > >>> are objects that cannot be pickled and therefore cannot be serialized > > > >>> to store in thesession. So, we're thinking of either creating an > > > >>> option to store auth_user virutual fields in auth.user, or maybe > > > >>> testing to make sure the virtual fields can be pickled, and excluding > > > >>> them if not. > > > > >>> Anthony > > > > >>> On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 5:30 AM, > > > >>> MichaelToomim<too...@cs.washington.edu> wrote: > > > >>> Awesome! I did not know there was an issue submission system. > > > > >>> On Jul 30, 2011, at 7:02 AM, Anthony wrote: > > > > >>>> An issue has been submitted, and this should be corrected soon. > > > > >>>> Anthony > > > > >>>> On Friday, July 29, 2011 9:57:30 PM UTC-4, Anthony wrote: > > > >>>> auth.user is Storage(table_user._filter_fields(user, id=True)). The > > > >>>> _filter_fields method of the auth_user table only selects actual > > > >>>> table fields, not virtual fields, so auth.user will not include any > > > >>>> virtual fields. Perhaps this should be changed. > > > > >>>> Anthony > > > > >>>> On Friday, July 29, 2011 9:05:39 PM UTC-4, MichaelToomimwrote: > > > >>>> I think I found a bug invirtualfields. I have the following > > > >>>> controller: > > > > >>>> def posts(): > > > >>>> user =session.auth.user > > > >>>> n = user.name # returns None > > > > >>>> Where "person" is defined as a virtualfield on user: > > > > >>>> class Users(): > > > >>>> def name(self): > > > >>>> return self.users.first_name + ' ' + self.users.last_name > > > >>>> db.users.virtualfields.append(Users()) > > > > >>>> The problem is that user.name returns None, because apparently the > > > >>>> virtualfield isn't loaded into thesessionvariable of user. > > > > >>>> I made this work with the following modification to the controller: > > > > >>>> def posts(): > > > >>>> user = db.users[session.auth.user.id] > > > >>>> n = user.name # returns the user name correctly! > > > > >>>> I just had to refetch the user from the database.
