GitHub is home to over 20 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add always_query_search_path attribute to PostgresqlAdapter.
By setting the attribute to true to enforce adapter query search_path from database every time rather than return the cached value.
This pull request have a commit that should not be here.
Can anybody who is kindly to tell me how to remove the commit from the pull request?
@timnew use rebase https://help.github.com/articles/interactive-rebase
Add attribute always_query_search_path to PostgresqlAdapter
Set attribute to true to force the adapter to get search path by querying database every time rather return the cached value.
Used in case that search_path set with raw sql rather than method call.
I'm not quite understand, my local copy is that I forked from origin.
But when I send the pull request, one more commit appears in my pull request, does it mean that someone remove a commit on the origin? Or I cannot understand where the commit is coming from.
If you change the commits that are on your master branch on your fork, this pull request gets updated. So if you use git rebase and force push to the branch again, it will update the request.
It appears that there's only one commit on this request now.
I have updated this pull request according to @LTe 's suggestion, I'm curious where the additional commit coming from. :)
I don't know why it was before, but it's not there now.
This will need rebased again if it's ever to be included.
/cc @tenderlove @jonleighton @rafaelfranca
What problem are you trying to solve?
This seems like a heavy-handed approach that could be solved better a different way. With this patch, you'll at a minimum issue a second query to the database for every single query your app executes (just due to the query cache alone).
Yes, I don't really understand this. I suggest discussing your problem on the mailing list first, as this is not going to be merged as-is.