>> AFAIK, the bottleneck tends to be the database, so a cache >> solution like memcached should make the deal. Think of a >> 256Mb cache for 10 seconds maybe. > > Yes, the database is generally the main bottleneck these days. > memcached is definitely on my radar.
It would also be helpful to know things about the usage patterns--particularly the read-to-write ratio and currency-demands. If most of your hits are reads, and stale data is okay (only updated every N minutes), then you're a top candidate for several of the caching solutions supported by Django. Or even front-end caches that prevent Django from even seeing the request. If most of your hits are reads, but they need to have the most up-to-date info, you can use a replicated DB cluster where writes are synchronized lockstep across the cluster, and then a load-balancer farms out the reads across the cluster. Or, you can have as part of your writing (perhaps in a save() call), calls to your cache-controller to invalidate affected pages. If you're write-heavy, best wishes! ;-) Data partitioning may help, as might a multi-master DB configuration. -tim --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
