launchpad-dev team mailing list archive

[Graham Binns <graham@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 8 October 2010 08:45, Robert Collins <robertc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 7:46 PM, Martin Pool <mbp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> I wonder if it'd be possible to make Storm send up a different type of
>> resultset for an unordered query, that would trap if you tried to do
>> something on it that seemed to indicate you needed something ordered?
>> For instance perhaps it would be reasonable to say that collections
>> iterated by TAL should always be ordered?  If uses of unordered sets
>> are really rare, perhaps they could stick out in code?
>
> The problem here is that 'set(resultset)' and 'list(resultset)' aren't
> distinguisable by the resultset (without -very- ugly code); slices /
> listification is where we would care about 'must have an order'; but
> even if that issue didn't exist, some order_by clauses are not
> sufficient, its not just *having one* that matters, its that it is
> sufficient to guarantee stability (where we care about that).
>
> The previous approach - add a random order-by to all queries which
> support order_by at all, worked well; I'm in favour of just bringing
> it back.
>

+1 on the assumption that Storm doesn't make it hard to do.

-- 
Graham Binns | PGP Key: EC66FA7D
http://launchpad.net/~gmb