#16679: Speed up signals by caching the reveicers per sender
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: akaariai | Owner: nobody
Type: | Status: new
Cleanup/optimization | Version: 1.3
Component: Database layer | Resolution:
(models, ORM) | Triage Stage: Accepted
Severity: Normal | Needs documentation: 0
Keywords: | Patch needs improvement: 1
Has patch: 1 | UI/UX: 0
Needs tests: 0 |
Easy pickings: 0 |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by Suor):
About failures: it's tests that wrong here, they rely on `.receivers`
property being list of receivers while I use more complex structure. Sure
adjusted tests should be added to my patch, I was just giving a try at a
moment.
About worst case: Yeah, the worst case is than combine() is needed. It
still has linear complexity, not so bad.
About caching: in fast-signals2.diff you use both `sender_receivers_cache`
and `sender_no_receivers_cache`. The latter seems superfluous you can just
store [] in the former, and then use something like:
{{{
if not self.receivers:
return []
if sender in self.sender_receivers_cache:
receivers = self.receivers_cache[sender]
else:
receivers = self.receivers_cache[sender] =
self._receivers_for_sender(sender)
return deref(receivers)
}}}
I also dropped `.use_caching` property. What can be a reason not to? Just
cache always since it don't change any behavior.
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/16679#comment:10>
Django <https://code.djangoproject.com/>
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django updates" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-updates@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/django-updates?hl=en.
