issue_comments: 688479163
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/sqlite-utils/pull/146#issuecomment-688479163 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/146 | 688479163 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY4ODQ3OTE2Mw== | 96218 | 2020-09-07T19:10:33Z | 2020-09-07T19:11:57Z | CONTRIBUTOR | @simonw -- I've gone ahead updated the documentation to reflect the changes introduced in this PR. IMO it's ready to merge now. In writing the documentation changes, I begin to wonder about the value and role of `batch_size` at all, tbh. May I assume it was originally intended to prevent using the entire row set to determine columns and column types, and that this was a performance consideration? If so, this PR entirely undermines its purpose. I've been passing in excess of 500,000 rows at a time to `insert_all()` with these changes and although I'm sure the performance difference is measurable it's not really noticeable; given #145, I don't know that any performance advantages outweigh the problems doing it this way removes. What do you think about just dropping the argument and defaulting to the maximum `batch_size` permissible given `SQLITE_MAX_VARS`? Are there other reasons one might want to restrict `batch_size` that I've overlooked? I could open a new issue to discuss/implement this. Of course the documentation will need to change again too if/when something is done about #147. | {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | 688668680 |