This repository was archived by the owner on Sep 30, 2023. It is now read-only.
SET opcode #50
Open
SET opcode #50
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
EDIT opcode to overwrite specific values
edit opcode
remove unneeded line
change arg order
Allow new fields/not checking if the field exists. It should be faster and more flexible this way.
optimized
proper ordering of edits
Change opcode name to SET
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This implements an SET opcode for docstores.
You specify a key, and edit parameters, so you can update certain values of a document. This could be useful for example if you have a document with many fields and you want to make a small change or toggle a setting without having to re-obtain and re-input all of the values in the whole document.
Usage:
await mydocstore.set(key, {"title": "new title", "setting": true})This removes the
handledchecking for going backwards, and checks through the oplog from oldest to newest, so I'm curious if people think that's a good idea or not.Also implements the changes in #48, apart from those relating to the above.