[development] Requiring node revisions

Karthik narakasura at gmail.com
Fri Jun 8 03:25:27 UTC 2007

On 08/06/07, Derek Wright <drupal at dwwright.net> wrote:
> 1) {node_revisions} *ALWAYS* has at least 1 record for any given
> node.  that's where title, body, etc are stored.  please read the
> schema if you have further questions.  therefore, the only site with
> an empty {node_revisions} table is the site with no nodes at all.
> 2) {node_revisions} has an index on nid, and we always JOIN on nid.
> by and large, the cost of this JOIN is constant, regardless of the #
> of rows in the table, since the JOINs basically always use the index.

Eh? So what is by and large? Does that mean some queries will be less efficient?

For example, how about if my module in contrib perform an ORDER BY on
node_revisions fields such as timestamp and uid? This would require a
filesort on the entire table ... Will these be unaffected?

This is essentially:

a) Taking away choice.
b) Increasing table size.
c) Introducing inefficiency.
d) Loading the table with potentially unnecessary junk whether I like it or not.
e) Asking me to sort any resulting issues out with another contrib module.
f) Telling me what's good for my site.

... all for the sake of a couple of checkboxes.

No thanks. -1.


More information about the development mailing list