[sqlalchemy] Re: Elixir performance
On 9/5/07, Paul Johnston [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: data. I did some benchmarks a while back to see how everything stacked up as I was wondering if I was doing everything the hard way (in C++) instead of using SqlAlchemy, etc. TurboEntity is the same as Great work Eric. I am quite surprised at the results. I would have thought ActiveMapper/TurboEntity would only be marginally slower than plain SQLAlchemy. To make this really clear (even though Michael said it already), ActiveMapper, TurboEntity and Elixir are not any slower than SA ORM. What is slower is SA ORM compared to SA SQL layer. In fact, Elixir querying system *is* SQLAlchemy proper. -- Gaëtan de Menten http://openhex.org --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sqlalchemy group. To post to this group, send email to sqlalchemy@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sqlalchemy?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sqlalchemy] Re: Elixir performance
since performance is the hot topic these days, I thought Id note that I've made some ORM improvements in the current SQLAlchemy trunk. We have a profiling test that loads 10 objects each with 50 child objects, eagerly loaded across 500 rows. Version 0.3.10 uses 70040 function calls, 0.4beta5 uses 53173, and trunk uses 37403. beta6 should feel pretty quick. On Sep 6, 2007, at 3:11 AM, Gaetan de Menten wrote: On 9/5/07, Paul Johnston [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: data. I did some benchmarks a while back to see how everything stacked up as I was wondering if I was doing everything the hard way (in C++) instead of using SqlAlchemy, etc. TurboEntity is the same as Great work Eric. I am quite surprised at the results. I would have thought ActiveMapper/TurboEntity would only be marginally slower than plain SQLAlchemy. To make this really clear (even though Michael said it already), ActiveMapper, TurboEntity and Elixir are not any slower than SA ORM. What is slower is SA ORM compared to SA SQL layer. In fact, Elixir querying system *is* SQLAlchemy proper. -- Gaëtan de Menten http://openhex.org --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sqlalchemy group. To post to this group, send email to sqlalchemy@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sqlalchemy?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sqlalchemy] Re: Elixir performance
I am quite surprised at the results. I would have thought ActiveMapper/TurboEntity would only be marginally slower than plain SQLAlchemy. And again, I'm surprised that SA is faster than MySQLdb. How does that work out? I though SA used MySQLdb??? Your use of query cache and best of three sounds sensible, but I've got a feeling we're seeing some kind of measurement effect in the results. I think SA is caching the results of the queries, so it has less processing to do than MySQLdb for the repeat queries. If those numbers are correct though, I'd expect fairly simple changes to Elixir could bring the performance close to plain SA. I think that's a reasonable assumption - I haven't had a chance to poke around under the hood due to other priorities, but I like Elixir and hope to see it improve in future versions. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sqlalchemy group. To post to this group, send email to sqlalchemy@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sqlalchemy?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sqlalchemy] Re: Elixir performance
Hi, data. I did some benchmarks a while back to see how everything stacked up as I was wondering if I was doing everything the hard way (in C++) instead of using SqlAlchemy, etc. TurboEntity is the same as Great work Eric. I am quite surprised at the results. I would have thought ActiveMapper/TurboEntity would only be marginally slower than plain SQLAlchemy. And again, I'm surprised that SA is faster than MySQLdb. How does that work out? I though SA used MySQLdb??? Your use of query cache and best of three sounds sensible, but I've got a feeling we're seeing some kind of measurement effect in the results. If those numbers are correct though, I'd expect fairly simple changes to Elixir could bring the performance close to plain SA. Paul --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sqlalchemy group. To post to this group, send email to sqlalchemy@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sqlalchemy?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sqlalchemy] Re: Elixir performance
On 9/4/07, Acm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am trying out Elixir 0.3.0 over SQLAlchemy 0.3.10 in a Python 2.5 environment. Are there any known performance issues with Elixir for CRUD (Create Select Update Delete) commands? Not that I know of. There shouldn't be any overhead (over raw SQLAlchemy) after the initial class initialization phase. -- Gaëtan de Menten http://openhex.org --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sqlalchemy group. To post to this group, send email to sqlalchemy@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sqlalchemy?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
