kotovalexarian-likes-github/database_cleaner
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/DatabaseCleaner/database_cleaner synced 2023-03-27 23:22:03 -04:00
Code Releases Activity

update links to https where available.

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
Micah Geisel 2019-12-10 09:58:58 -08:00
parent 3d207e429f
commit b1046de59e
6 changed files with 10 additions and 10 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

4
adapters/database_cleaner-active_record/README.md
View file

@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ Here is an overview of the supported strategies:
(Default strategy is denoted in bold)
For support or to discuss development please use the [Google Group](http://groups.google.com/group/database_cleaner).
For support or to discuss development please use the [Google Group](https://groups.google.com/group/database_cleaner).
## What strategy is fastest?
@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ Another approach is to have the transactions rolled back in the application's pr
An easier, but slower, solution is to use the `:truncation` or `:deletion` strategy.
So what is fastest out of `:deletion` and `:truncation`? Well, it depends on your table structure and what percentage of tables you populate in an average test. The reasoning is out of the scope of this README but here is a [good SO answer on this topic for Postgres](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/11419536/postgresql-truncation-speed/11423886#11423886).
So what is fastest out of `:deletion` and `:truncation`? Well, it depends on your table structure and what percentage of tables you populate in an average test. The reasoning is out of the scope of this README but here is a [good SO answer on this topic for Postgres](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/11419536/postgresql-truncation-speed/11423886#11423886).
Some people report much faster speeds with `:deletion` while others say `:truncation` is faster for them. The best approach therefore is it try all options on your test suite and see what is faster.