- Status changed to RTBC
almost 2 years ago 5:47pm 7 February 2023 - πΊπΈUnited States smustgrave
Passed D10 and looks like a good simple change.
- Status changed to Needs work
almost 2 years ago 7:16pm 7 February 2023 - π¬π§United Kingdom longwave UK
Can you add a comment as to why this could be greater than, so we don't accidentally undo it in the future? Also should we assert that the number of queries is either N or N+1, rather than allowing any larger number?
- Status changed to Needs review
almost 2 years ago 9:38am 13 February 2023 - Status changed to RTBC
almost 2 years ago 3:24pm 13 February 2023 - π³π±Netherlands arantxio Dordrecht
The requested comments have been added.
Also should we assert that the number of queries is either N or N+1, rather than allowing any larger number?
We currently do not have a clean assertion for a number range so testing for this would mean we have to add logic for this which could make the code look less readable.
So unless we have something for that for me it's back to RTBC.
- Status changed to Needs review
over 1 year ago 10:04am 17 February 2023 - π¬π§United Kingdom catch
Do we need to move this to a base class, and then allow individual drivers to override it? Then core database drivers could keep the stricter assertion.
- πΊπΈUnited States smustgrave
@catch could that be done here or in a follow up?
- Status changed to Needs work
over 1 year ago 5:06pm 20 February 2023 - πΊπΈUnited States smustgrave
to address #12. Can this added to the base class?