Changes between Initial Version and Version 1 of Ticket #35904, comment 1


Ignore:
Timestamp:
Nov 11, 2024, 12:12:34 PM (3 days ago)
Author:
Simon Charette

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified

  • Ticket #35904, comment 1

    initial v1  
    33This sounds interesting particularly given features like [https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/5.1/topics/testing/overview/#test-case-serialized-rollback test case serialized rollbacks] (which are quite slow) are based on top of model serialization. It would have to be a distinct option as `bulk_create` doesn't fire signals which some setup might require.
    44
    5 Just like any new feature requests though [https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/5.1/internals/contributing/bugs-and-features/#requesting-features they should be discussed on the forum to reach a consensus] before being accepted. Given this is a performance related new feature I suggest your proposal come equipped with some details about what kind of improvements users should expect backed by step to reproduce as well as a PoC that properly deals with other features of serde framework such as natural keys and a plan on how to deal with backends that don't support `ignore_conflicts`.
     5Just like any new feature requests though [https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/5.1/internals/contributing/bugs-and-features/#requesting-features they should be discussed on the forum to reach a consensus] before being accepted. Given this is a performance related new feature I suggest your proposal come equipped with some details about what kind of improvements users should expect (profiles, benchmarks instead of solely claiming it's fairly inefficient) backed by step to reproduce as well as a PoC that properly deals with other features of serde framework such as natural keys and a plan on how to deal with backends that don't support `ignore_conflicts`. It might even be a good opportunity to augment [https://github.com/django/django-asv our performance tracking system with serde benchmarks].
    66
    77Assuming there is interest in moving forward we can then re-open this issue.
Back to Top