issue_comments: 537716955
This data as json
| html_url | issue_url | id | node_id | user | created_at | updated_at | author_association | body | reactions | issue | performed_via_github_app |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/283#issuecomment-537716955 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/283 | 537716955 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUzNzcxNjk1NQ== | 9599 | 2019-10-02T23:02:15Z | 2019-10-02T23:02:15Z | OWNER | I've been thinking pretty hard about this as part of #569. My big concerns are: * If I'm caching and reusing connections I need to worry about the different combinations - if I have four databases do I cache separate connections for the ("one", "two") AND ("two", "three") AND ("one", "three") and so on pairs? * How does the API and interface deal with instances where you have a database connected as the primary and you want to ATTACH another database and talk to that as well? I think the best way to do this is to say that cross-database joins will only be available against the `:memory:` database. Maybe with an optional mode you can run like `datasette --crossdb` which causes every database to be `ATTACHd` to that connection with an alias so you can start running queries. If this proves to be a problem when hundreds of files are attached to a Datasette Library instance (#417) then maybe cross database joins are handled (in that case) by the authenticated user selecting which ones to ?_attach= and detaching them at the end of the request. Also perhaps limit to joining across a maximum of 3 databases at once in this case. I can probably avoid the scariest negative consequences of cross-database joins by having them turned off by default for signed-out users. The datasette-on-my-laptop or authenticated Datasette Library cases can be opt-in and can be a little less locked down. | {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | 325958506 |