Michel
> it may be more efficient Note that it's a **may**: - It's not more efficient for a write work load. - It's also less efficient if you just need...
@sjmueller -- In most of the cases, using a third table is better. The case when you actually get better performance from using embedded arrays is really narrow as far...
I thought a little about that, and implementing something like `document.isDirty()` is doable, but requires to make a deep copy of the document. So the question is just about what...
Why do you want to drop the table? To recreate indexes? Can you expand a bit on how you migrate and why you need tableDrop/tableCreate?
Would you prefer an option to drop and recreate an index if one is found?
@marshall007 -- you are missing a line in your modifications: ``` innerQuery = innerQuery.getJoin(modelToGet[key], getAll, gotModel)._query; ``` This makes the joins recursive like if you do ``` A.hasOne(B, ...) B.hasOne(C,...
The `count` should be relatively cheap. It's `count` on an array that is in memory. But maybe there's a big. How big are your arrays?
Not really, I'm pretty busy at the moment. What do you need?
If your question is about the project in general, it's pretty complete in my opinion. The missing feature that would be needed to achieve parity are tagged here: https://github.com/neumino/reqlite/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3A%22missing+feature%22 There...
Sorry I missed this issue in my emails. If I read properly the definition of polymorphic associations, these are currently not available. Slightly related to #362 too