Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> added the comment: On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 2:29 PM, Raymond Hettinger <rep...@bugs.python.org> wrote: > I did find a simple way to dynamically resize the maxcache, but did not apply > it yet. Will look at more applications to see if it is really needed. > > Nick, thanks for the great ideas. These changes simplified the code where > they were applied and resulted in a smarter caching strategy.
The reason I mentioned the dynamic sizing specifically was that the discussions where we realised we had all these different caches floating around had to do with tuning the caching strategy to a particular application based on speed vs memory trade-offs. While we can pick a number that is a reasonable default, a server deployment may want to turn the dial towards faster response times with higher memory consumption, while an embedded device may want to push the dial the other way. The smarter caching strategies you added are likely to help far more than the blunt hammer approach of increasing the cache size, but the speed/memory trade-off in choosing that size is still a question that has no universally correct answer. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue9396> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
