# I added 1 Million constraints to an LP unwittingly

**URL:** <https://discourse.julialang.org/t/i-added-1-million-constraints-to-an-lp-unwittingly/127668>\
**Category:** Optimization (Mathematical)\
**Tags:** question, jump, examples, gurobi, experience\
**Created:** [April 3, 2025, 11:12am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/i-added-1-million-constraints-to-an-lp-unwittingly/127668 "2025-04-03T11:12:09Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 13

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![WalterMadelim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/3e96dc/32.png) [@WalterMadelim](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/WalterMadelim)\
**Post date:** [April 4, 2025, 6:08am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/i-added-1-million-constraints-to-an-lp-unwittingly/127668/13 "2025-04-04T06:08:54Z")

</div>

I think `Lazy` is somewhat _pointless_, compared with `LazyConstraints`.  
The latter is useful when we have infinitely many (implicit) cuts, e.g. emulating a SDP constraint (see the `while`-loop in [this](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/slow-progress-or-numerical-error-a-simple-but-nontrivial-sdp-example-solved-with-lp-relaxation/127399/8) example).  
If we have finitely many explicit cuts (e.g., in the context of this topic), then we have 2 possibilities

1. the number of these cuts are small, e.g. 10 cuts
2. the number of these cuts are huge, e.g. 1 million

It’s manifest that it would be pointless to use `Lazy` for merely 10 cuts.  
Now suppose we submit 1 million explicit cuts to Gurobi, setting the `Lazy` attribute. What’s its meaning?  
Shouldn’t let gurobi decide which part of constraints should be deemed “lazy” to accelerate the solution procedure. After all, it is a black-box solver. It’s weird.

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/i-added-1-million-constraints-to-an-lp-unwittingly/127668)._