Querysets joins about django-balancer

[bkonkle]

This is definitely an interesting problem, and it's something I want to spend more time thinking about. It makes sense to me to simply pin all the queries from a single request to one database, but I'd like to test it out and see what kind of side effects this would introduce. In the meantime, you may need to adjust your code to work around this limitation.

[sebzur]

Thank You for this fast comment! Pinning all the queries from a single request to one DB I also find out (at least as a first thought) to be a reasonable solution.

I hope You will find some time to provide the additional router to handle the issue - I can't wait to test it!

[bkonkle]

I've finished a first pass at this feature, but I don't have an active project right now that I can do some real testing with. Can you test it out and let me know what you think?

Checkout the "feature/request-pinning" branch and set REQUEST_PINNING to True in your settings.py.

Thanks!

[wolph]

Since you usually want to spread the load as much as possible, I would vote against pinning within a transaction unless really needed (i.e. with writes and replication lag).

In this case I would go for a solution where you get a database from the router (i.e. db = db_for_read(Person)) and do a young_people, old_people = young_people.using(db), old_people.using(db) to use the same database for this specific case.

[sebzur]

Okay, that's good to see that. I'll try to switch from pgpool to the django-router and test this update. Thanks a lot for Your time!

Of course, specifying the common db with .using in queryset is a solution that one should use for the merges. However, in my rather big project I'll have to localize all occurrences of these and switch them.

The update that bkonkle have entered handles the cases before the switch.

I'll give You the info how it works soon.