fix for add from pool bug (long loading time) mantis 47724

[mglaubitz]

we let one of our local AI models (GLM 5.2) analyse the problem and create a bug fix. this reduces loading time on ourt exam-test server from 3.6 minutes to 6.2 seconds (!)

[kergomard]

Hi @mglaubitz

Thank you for the PR.

First one question:

• Did a developer look at this PR before it was posted? Who was it, so I can interact with them and so I know who takes responsibility for this code? Please be so kind and only have developers create PR changing code, we need a vis-a-vis to interact with.

What happens if you only add the first of the two changes (the index) provided in this PR: This index seems to be added to improve the existing query (and potentially the new one) as the corresponding fields seem to not show up elsewhere in your changes. It should already improve the situation somewhat. What was the improvement if only this change was applied (see)?

Questions:

• Why does the existence of a range disallow the usage of a two phase query? I can see why it would not be necessary, but no reason to disallow it.
• Structurally this to me seems wrong: It creates a completely separate execution path if a set of conditions is met. I think the correct path would be to create a "vanilla" path when there are no filters or limits. This path can (and probably already should contain two steps). Then the first step is enriched with the data that is needed for a correct filtering and ordering. The first query should then not only retrieve the ids, but all data that can easily be retrieved. The second step should only add the data that is hard to retrieve and it should only do so, if retrieving it was not already necessary to complete the first step.

Change Requests:

• Please remove all comments. They just clutter the PR.
• Please never have two nested function calls on one line.
• Please go through the code and fix unnecessary complexity (e.g. here) and inconsistencies (e.g. that variables are once in curly braces and once not in the previous link, where the use of variables should be removed anyway, but just as an example). All variables in strings should always be in curly braces.
• Please move all table names used to class constants. This is more relevant now, as you are qualifying fields in a separate function "qualifyOrderField()". Please qualify everything not only the order fields. This will lead to a more readable query.

This is just the first round, as far as I can see. I.e. function naming seems to be somewhat lacking, but the correct names will only become clear once we really have a final structure. Once this is done the code should have become more readable and logical, so that we can figure out, what else needs to be done.

Best,
@kergomard