html_url,issue_url,id,node_id,user,created_at,updated_at,author_association,body,reactions,issue,performed_via_github_app
https://github.com/simonw/datasette/pull/2008#issuecomment-1407716963,https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/2008,1407716963,IC_kwDOBm6k_c5T6A5j,193185,2023-01-29T17:04:03Z,2023-01-29T17:04:03Z,CONTRIBUTOR,"Performance tests - I think most places don't have them as a formal gate enforced by CI. TypeScript and scalac seem to have tests that run to capture timings. The timings are included by a bot as a comment or build check, and also stored in a database so you can graph changes over time to spot regressions. Probably overkill for Datasette!

Window functions - oh, good point. Looks like Ubuntu shipped JSON1 support as far back as sqlite 3.11. I'll let this PR linger until there's a way to run against different SQLite versions. For now, I'm shipping this with `datasette-ui-extras`, since I think it's OK for a plugin to enforce a higher minimum requirement.

Tests - there actually did end up being test changes to capture the undercount bug of the current implementation, so the current implementation would fail against the new tests.

Perhaps a non-window function version could be written that uses `random()` instead of `row_number() over ()` in order to get a unique key. It's technically not unique, but in practice, I imagine it'll work well.","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",1560982210,
https://github.com/simonw/datasette/pull/2008#issuecomment-1407561308,https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/2008,1407561308,IC_kwDOBm6k_c5T5a5c,193185,2023-01-29T04:50:50Z,2023-01-29T04:50:50Z,CONTRIBUTOR,I pushed a revised version which ends up being faster -- the example which currently takes 4 seconds now runs in 500ms.,"{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",1560982210,
https://github.com/simonw/datasette/pull/2008#issuecomment-1407558284,https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/2008,1407558284,IC_kwDOBm6k_c5T5aKM,193185,2023-01-29T04:23:58Z,2023-01-29T04:24:27Z,CONTRIBUTOR,"Ack, this PR is broken. I see now that the `inner.*` is necessary for ensuring the correct count in the face of rows having duplicate values in views.

That fixes the overcounting, but I think can undercount when the rows have the same data, eg a view like:

```sql
SELECT '[""bar""]' tags UNION ALL SELECT '[""bar""]'
```

will produce a count of `{""bar"": 1 }`, when it should be `{""bar"": 2}`. In fact, this could apply in tables without primary keys, too.

If `inner` came from a base table that had a primary key or a rowid, we could use those column(s) to solve that case.

I guess a general solution would be to compute a window function so we have a distinct ID for each row. Will fiddle to see if I can get that working.","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",1560982210,
https://github.com/simonw/datasette/pull/2008#issuecomment-1407470429,https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/2008,1407470429,IC_kwDOBm6k_c5T5Etd,193185,2023-01-28T19:34:29Z,2023-01-28T19:34:29Z,CONTRIBUTOR,"I don't know how/if you do automated tests for performance, so I haven't changed any of the tests.","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",1560982210,