a new method of ProposedNew set comparison
#32563
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
jbardin
force-pushed
the
jbardin/optional-computed-comparison-next
branch
from
350dc05
to
86cbab2
Compare
The existing set comparison method uses the prior elements with the computed portions nulled out to find candidates to match the configuration. This has the shortcoming of always removing optional+computed attributes, because we have not yet found the configuration to know if attribute was set or not. Rather than having to take the most pessimistic value before comparison to precompute the nulled values, we can compare each candidate directly, walking the values in tandem. Each prior value is compared against the config and checked to see if it could have been derived from that configuration value, which allows us to treat optional+computed as optional if there is config and computed if there is not. This removes the ambiguity from having optional+computed attributes within sets, giving us consistent plans when all values are known. Unknown values of course are still undecidable, as are edge cases were providers refresh with altered values or retained changed prior values plan that were deemed not functionally significant.
jbardin
force-pushed
the
jbardin/optional-computed-comparison-next
branch
from
aeb12ae
to
60d6e52
Compare
alisdair
approved these changes
Jan 25, 2023
|
Reminder for the merging maintainer: if this is a user-visible change, please update the changelog on the appropriate release branch. |
|
I'm going to lock this pull request because it has been closed for 30 days ⏳. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active contributions. |
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The existing
ProposedNewset comparison method uses the prior elements with the computed portions nulled out to find candidates to match the configuration. This has the shortcoming of always removing optional+computed attributes, because we have not yet found the configuration to know if attribute was set or not.Rather than having to take the most pessimistic value before comparison to precompute the nulled values, we can compare each candidate config and prior pair directly, walking the values in tandem. Each prior value is compared against the config and checked to see if it could have been derived from that configuration value, which allows us to treat optional+computed as optional if there is config and computed if there is not.
This removes the ambiguity from having optional+computed attributes within sets, giving us consistent plans when all values are known. Unknown values of course are still undecidable, as are edge cases were providers refresh with altered values or retained changed prior values plan that were deemed not functionally significant. We also cannot descend into nested sets, not only because the combinatorial problem of matching all possible nested values, but because we can't lookup nested blocks by paths nor can we use
path.Applywhen indexing through sets. The latter problems are possible to solve, through refactoring the schema and temporarily restructuring the set elements for comparison, but unless a compelling use case for such a structure arises the additional complexity has little benefit.