[Dbix-class] (no subject)

[Aaron Trevena]

On 2 July 2012 15:21, Marc Espie <espie at nerim.net> wrote:
> Not so much a surprise... a bit sad, though.
>
> Compare Tim Bunce's presentation of DBI (which does emphasize that speed
> is really important) with the mostly "don't care about performance at all"
> in DBIx::Class.

I don't think any of the developers or those in the community that use
dbic have ever said that, and it's certainly not something I've seen
or heard or even inferred from what I've seen.

Features like pre-fetching, caching and solving the inefficiency (and
other problems) of the older and much simpler Class::DBI were part of
the raison d'etre of DBIC, that's continued to this day, particularly
with frew's recent work that has provided Tim Bunce with optimisations
and improvements to DBI itself.

> I know that I've given up on DBIx::Class myself, precisely because there's
> such a huge overhead (most of which isn't really that explainable, actually,
> there's something as over-generality).

I've worked on large codebases, big databases and busy sites - busy
enough that we hit the limitations of the simple master/slave
clustering in mysql, and never, not once was the perfomance or
"overhead" of DBIC a problem - it saved a lot of developer time both
my making work easier and by reducing bugs in handcoded SQL that
enabled us to focus on the actual bottlenecks you see when scaling a
large system accross multiple database and web servers, not to mention
mogilefs and solr/lucene servers.

> Question: did you consider adding more classes to your study ? I'm thinking
> of John Syracusa's Rose framework, which
> - is quite a lot cleaner than DBIx::Class
> - doesn't try to include the kitchen sink.

By which you mean, (once you take out the subjective snark) can
sometimes be faster by doing less work and being less helpful?

HTH HAND

A.

-- 
Aaron J Trevena, BSc Hons
http://www.aarontrevena.co.uk
LAMP System Integration, Development and Consulting