feat: Support Through Relationships #1780
Conversation
|
is this a feat or enhancement? 🤔😅 |
|
This would be a feature 😄 . Will have to review next week. |
ken-kost
force-pushed
the
feat-relationships-enable-through-option
branch
from
39b2366 to
d301173
Compare
| @@ -1191,6 +1251,9 @@ defmodule Ash.Actions.Read.Relationships do | |||
| has_page? = query.page not in [nil, false] | |||
|
|
|||
| cond do | |||
| is_list(relationship.through) -> | |||
| false | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So this will actually be the way that we enable data layers to join through relationships. So this should return true if the data layer can :lateral_join_through_relationships or something. For now, nothing will implement this, so we can leave it as a stub and talk about that implementation later. It is actually quite complex to do 😄
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In fact...yeah returning false makes sense here, never mind. When its time to support doing this in an optimized way in the data layer, then we'd return true here.
| @@ -612,6 +623,50 @@ defmodule Ash.Actions.Read.Relationships do | |||
| ) | |||
| end | |||
|
|
|||
| defp load_related_records(records, through, cardinality) do | |||
| load_statement = | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We need to pass through the actor, tenant, authorize? and tracer options from the parent call to this call.
Additionally, we should call Ash.load with the list of records, not each individual record. That will be much more optimized.
#72
Contributor checklist