Summary | Turba Browse is very inefficient |
Queue | Turba |
Queue Version | Git master |
Type | Enhancement |
State | Rejected |
Priority | 1. Low |
Owners | |
Requester | slusarz (at) horde (dot) org |
Created | 03/09/2012 (4843 days ago) |
Due | |
Updated | 06/27/2012 (4733 days ago) |
Assigned | |
Resolved | 06/27/2012 (4733 days ago) |
Milestone | |
Patch | No |
State ⇒ Rejected
current code.
and 2) there is the user preference that defines the name format for
sorting. For the filtering to reliably work, this would require
composing the fields on the database level. I doubt this is going to
be possible in a portable way.
are designed. The Browse View is passed a search result, and it is
only in that view that the filter (from URL parameter data) is
determined.
In other words, the filter can't be applied at the time the search is
done based on the current architecture.
on every page, regardless if you are filtering - for example, by a
letter when using the alphabet pager. It is the View code that is
doing the filtering. This is incorrect behavior - the query should
be filtered at the DB level instead - it reduces overhead and SQL is
precisely designed for this kind of filtering, so it is the proper
tool for the job.
startwith('a')
This probably applies to more backends.
Priority ⇒ 1. Low
Patch ⇒ No
Milestone ⇒
Queue ⇒ Turba
Summary ⇒ Turba Browse is very inefficient
Type ⇒ Enhancement
State ⇒ New
every page, regardless if you are filtering - for example, by a letter
when using the alphabet pager. It is the View code that is doing the
filtering. This is incorrect behavior - the query should be filtered
at the DB level instead - it reduces overhead and SQL is precisely
designed for this kind of filtering, so it is the proper tool for the
job.