Understood, but I am interested in seeing what sort of hit/miss ratio I get. There are uses and ways to design around data loss (for example, sequential #'s would be expected by the reader, a miss would end up generating a write to the datastore which could be monitored by the sender to trigger a resend. I know the design would not be ideal but I sort of like the challenge of staying under those cpu thresholds!
On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 2:13 PM, Wooble <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Oct 17, 12:52 pm, "Ethan Post" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I guess > > I could skip the datastore entirely for some features and use memcache, > > which I might do, I just have not had time to play around with that yet. > > It's almost certainly a bad idea to rely on memcache for a queue; > there's no guarantee that what you put in will come out when you want > it. > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine" group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
