New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
some stock optimizations #6838
some stock optimizations #6838
Conversation
@@ -39,7 +39,7 @@ pytz==2014.10 | |||
PyYAML==3.10 | |||
raven==3.1.17 | |||
requests==2.0.0 | |||
south==0.7.3 | |||
south==1.0.2 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I tested this on staging and was able to deploy without any issues. Also reviewed the change log and didn't see anything that should break (so did @emord: https://github.com/dimagi/commcare-hq/pull/6794/files#r30916913)
👍 from me once tests pass (didn't review super closely though) |
Updated to remove the new index (will make a separate PR). This should be gtg. |
|
||
ret = {} | ||
for case_id, section_id, product_id in results: | ||
sections = ret.setdefault(section_id, {}) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
just for my own education, any reason to use this over defaultdict
?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
No reason in this case.
good to merge once tests pass |
kicked build |
@benrudolph
cc @twymer @czue