On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 08:42:13AM +0100, Ivan Vilata i Balaguer wrote:
> Hi Hatem. This issue has been discussed several times in this list
> (this is the famous ``VLTable`` affair ;):
>
> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg00555.html
> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg00156.html
> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg00084.html
> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg00077.html
I have found the first one earlier but the rest are closer to what I was
looking for. Thanks.
> In short: for the time being, you can use a separate ``VLArray`` with
> matching row numbers, or a wide enough string field (for strings, of
> course), and avoid some overhead by using compression.
I however have a slightly different problem that maybe a little more
complicated, maybe not. I have structures of the following pythonic
form.
[[1, 2, 3], [4, 5], [6], [7, 8, 9, 10]]
Which if you like is a python representation of a combinatorial design.
I would like to place them in my database. From what I read in the above
threads and others, I understood that:
- VLArray has a large overhead
So in my case it might be better to pickle these objects in a fixed
width field. However, Is it possible to have a single VLArray to host a
number of the above mentioned structure. I.e. Can the VLArray have 3
dimensions, to finally look like:
VLArray ( [
[[1, 2, 3], [4, 5], [6], [7, 8, 9, 10]],
[[1, 2], [3, 4, 5], [7, 8, 9, 6]],
[[4, 5], [6], [7, 3, 2, 1]],
[[1, 2, 3], [4, 5], [6]],
[[1], [4, 5], [7, 8, 2, 3]],
...
] )
Or place vlarray instances in an enlargeable array?
Thanks,
--
Hatem Nassrat
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
Pytables-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pytables-users
