/-/versions output
{
""python"": {
""version"": ""3.8.0"",
""full"": ""3.8.0 (default, Oct 28 2019, 16:14:01) \n[GCC 8.3.0]""
},
""datasette"": {
""version"": ""0.44""
},
""asgi"": ""3.0"",
""uvicorn"": ""0.11.5"",
""sqlite"": {
""version"": ""3.22.0"",
""fts_versions"": [
""FTS5"",
""FTS4"",
""FTS3""
],
""extensions"": {
""json1"": null
},
""compile_options"": [
""COMPILER=gcc-7.4.0"",
""ENABLE_COLUMN_METADATA"",
""ENABLE_DBSTAT_VTAB"",
""ENABLE_FTS3"",
""ENABLE_FTS3_PARENTHESIS"",
""ENABLE_FTS3_TOKENIZER"",
""ENABLE_FTS4"",
""ENABLE_FTS5"",
""ENABLE_JSON1"",
""ENABLE_LOAD_EXTENSION"",
""ENABLE_PREUPDATE_HOOK"",
""ENABLE_RTREE"",
""ENABLE_SESSION"",
""ENABLE_STMTVTAB"",
""ENABLE_UNLOCK_NOTIFY"",
""ENABLE_UPDATE_DELETE_LIMIT"",
""HAVE_ISNAN"",
""LIKE_DOESNT_MATCH_BLOBS"",
""MAX_SCHEMA_RETRY=25"",
""MAX_VARIABLE_NUMBER=250000"",
""OMIT_LOOKASIDE"",
""SECURE_DELETE"",
""SOUNDEX"",
""TEMP_STORE=1"",
""THREADSAFE=1""
]
}
}
",107914493,datasette,issue,,,"{""url"": ""https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/859/reactions"", ""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,
643510821,MDU6SXNzdWU2NDM1MTA4MjE=,862,Set an upper limit on total facet suggestion time for a page,9599,simonw,open,0,,,,,1,2020-06-23T03:57:55Z,2020-06-23T03:58:48Z,,OWNER,,"If a table has 100 columns the facet suggestion code will currently run 100 times, taking a max of `facet_suggest_time_limit_ms` which defaults to 50ms per column:
https://github.com/simonw/datasette/blob/000528192eaf891118932250141dabe7a1561ece/datasette/facets.py#L142-L162
So for 100 columns, that's 100 * 50ms = 5s total time that might be spent attempting to calculate facets on a large table!
I should implement a hard upper limit on the total amount of time taken suggesting facets - probably of around 500ms. If it takes longer than that the remaining columns will not be considered.",107914493,datasette,issue,,,"{""url"": ""https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/862/reactions"", ""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,
646448486,MDExOlB1bGxSZXF1ZXN0NDQwNzM1ODE0,868,initial windows ci setup,702729,joshmgrant,open,0,,,,,3,2020-06-26T18:49:13Z,2021-07-10T23:41:43Z,,FIRST_TIME_CONTRIBUTOR,simonw/datasette/pulls/868,Picking up the work done on #557 with a new PR. Seeing if I can get this working.,107914493,datasette,pull,,,"{""url"": ""https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/868/reactions"", ""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",0,
646737558,MDU6SXNzdWU2NDY3Mzc1NTg=,870,Refactor default views to use register_routes,9599,simonw,open,0,,,,,10,2020-06-27T18:53:12Z,2022-03-15T20:07:18Z,,OWNER,,"It would be much cleaner if Datasette's default views were all registered using the new `register_routes()` plugin hook. Could dramatically reduce the code in `datasette/app.py`.
> The ideal fix here would be to rework my `BaseView` subclass mechanism to work with `register_routes()` so that those views don't have any special privileges above plugin-provided views.
_Originally posted by @simonw in https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/864#issuecomment-648580556_",107914493,datasette,issue,,,"{""url"": ""https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/870/reactions"", ""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,
647095487,MDU6SXNzdWU2NDcwOTU0ODc=,873,"""datasette -p 0 --root"" gives the wrong URL",9599,simonw,open,0,,,,,14,2020-06-29T04:03:06Z,2020-08-18T17:26:10Z,,OWNER,,"```
$ datasette -p 0 --root
http://127.0.0.1:0/-/auth-token?token=2d498c...
```
The port is incorrect.",107914493,datasette,issue,,,"{""url"": ""https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/873/reactions"", ""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,
648435885,MDU6SXNzdWU2NDg0MzU4ODU=,878,"New pattern for views that return either JSON or HTML, available for plugins",9599,simonw,open,0,,,3268330,Datasette 1.0,26,2020-06-30T19:26:13Z,2022-03-19T16:19:30Z,,OWNER,,"Can be part of #870 - refactoring existing views to use `register_routes()`.
> I'm going to put the new `check_permissions()` method on `BaseView` as well. If I want that method to be available to plugins I can do so by turning that `BaseView` class into a documented API that plugins are encouraged to use themselves.
_Originally posted by @simonw in https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/832#issuecomment-651995453_",107914493,datasette,issue,,,"{""url"": ""https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/878/reactions"", ""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,
648659536,MDU6SXNzdWU2NDg2NTk1MzY=,881,Figure out why restore_working_directory is needed in some places,9599,simonw,open,0,,,,,0,2020-07-01T04:19:25Z,2020-07-01T04:19:25Z,,OWNER,,"This is a frustrating workaround. I have a `restore_working_directory` fixture that I wrote to solve errors that look like this:
```
/Users/simon/Dropbox/Development/datasette/tests/test_publish_cloudrun.py:148:
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
/usr/local/opt/python/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/3.7/lib/python3.7/contextlib.py:112: in __enter__
return next(self.gen)
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
self =