On Jun 27, 8:07 pm, Robert Coup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Marty Alchin wrote:
> > Regardless though, I think Jacob makes the best point so far: Django's
> > cache system is robust enough to handle it if you pick a decent
> > backend. And if there's a need to make the built-in options more
> >
Marty Alchin wrote:
> I remembered seeing that FastCGI can not only run as prefork,
Thank goodness.
> but defaults to it.
Thank *goodness*.
One day mutable-shared-state, preemptive multithreading will be looked down
on as the ugly, awful, historical accident that it is.
The signs are good
> > The biggest hurdle to dbsettings at this point is that it caches
> > settings in a standard Python module, which only exists within a
> > single process. This was all well and good while developing it, but
> > people are now starting to try it under mod_python, which (depending
> > on the
On Wed, Jun 27, 2007 at 02:41:15PM -, Donny wrote:
>
> On Jun 26, 11:28 am, "Marty Alchin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The biggest hurdle to dbsettings at this point is that it caches
> > settings in a standard Python module, which only exists within a
> > single process. This was all well
On Jun 26, 11:28 am, "Marty Alchin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The biggest hurdle to dbsettings at this point is that it caches
> settings in a standard Python module, which only exists within a
> single process. This was all well and good while developing it, but
> people are now starting to
Marty Alchin wrote:
> Regardless though, I think Jacob makes the best point so far: Django's
> cache system is robust enough to handle it if you pick a decent
> backend. And if there's a need to make the built-in options more
> robust, we can deal with that when the need arises.
>
What about
On 6/26/07, James Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The docs claim the locmem backend is multi-process. Am I misreading that?
Hrm, no, you're not misreading it. I hadn't noticed that line before
you mentioned it, but I didn't see anything in the code that looked
like it handled the
On 6/26/07, Marty Alchin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Except that if people aren't using memcached, but locmem, for example,
> invalidating the cache only does so for that current process, which
> would result in the same problem we're currently having. That is,
> unless I'm reading the code
On Jun 27, 6:31 am, "Marty Alchin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 6/26/07, Jay Parlar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > That said, mod_python does provide its own autoreloading import
> > > system[1], which could probably be used for this, I suppose. By doing
> > > it that way, it would only
On 6/26/07, Jacob Kaplan-Moss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Seems to me that this is exactly the problem that Django's cache
> framework was designed to solve. I don't see a reason to reinvent the
> wheel for dbsettings...
>
> It should be extremely simple to invalidate the cache if/when the
>
On 6/26/07, Jay Parlar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > That said, mod_python does provide its own autoreloading import
> > system[1], which could probably be used for this, I suppose. By doing
> > it that way, it would only reload the one file, which should happen
> > pretty quickly. It's
Another problem with a file is that you generally have to rewrite the
entire file to update just one value. Suppose process A has read the
filed, then process B reads the file. Then process A updates value FOO
and overwrites the file. Process B then updates value BAR and
overwrites the file. The
Seems to me that this is exactly the problem that Django's cache
framework was designed to solve. I don't see a reason to reinvent the
wheel for dbsettings...
It should be extremely simple to invalidate the cache if/when the
setting is changed, and if people are using memcached like all good
On 6/26/07, Marty Alchin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I could use a file as cache, yes, but what you're dsecribing wouldn't
> really work well in production environments. To my knowledge, Django
> reloads itself in its entirety if any loaded modules are changed, not
> just a single file. Sure,
On 6/26/07, David Danier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Or why not use a python-file as "cache"? AFAIK Django already reloads
> the settings-file if is has changes. So why not use this and put the
> settings generated from the DB there (or in some file imported in
> settings.py). A
> I have not yet used your app (although I had intended to until I read
> this) so I assumed you had worked this out already.
Same goes for me, but I try to answer something useful anyway.
> The thing is, if
> each process has to look to a central location to retrieve/update, why
> not use the
On 6/26/07, Waylan Limberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have not yet used your app (although I had intended to until I read
> this) so I assumed you had worked this out already. The thing is, if
> each process has to look to a central location to retrieve/update, why
> not use the db as that
Carl,
Thats application settings which are stored in a db (thus dbsettings -
with no space). See http://code.google.com/p/django-values/ for more
info.
Marty,
I have not yet used your app (although I had intended to until I read
this) so I assumed you had worked this out already. The thing is,
On 6/26/07, Carl Karsten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Forgive my ignorance, but this doesn't seem like a problem that will come up
> too
> often, so the solution is going to be pretty custom.
>
> Why would you be changing db settings on the fly?
I've put together an app called dbsettings[1]
Marty Alchin wrote:
> I expect this isn't the best way to ask this, but this is where the
> dbsettings saga has played out so far, and you guys have a good idea
> of what I'm trying to do, so I'm asking anyway.
>
> The biggest hurdle to dbsettings at this point is that it caches
> settings in a
On 6/26/07, Jeremy Dunck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Assuming I've understood the issue, and if you don't expect concurrent
> writes, consider a BDB.
>
> Also, these may or may not be interesting:
> http://www.dekorte.com/projects/opensource/
Well, the dekorte stuff looks interesting, but I'm
On 6/26/07, Marty Alchin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
> Has anybody on here ever had a need to do something like this? If so,
> are there other decent solutions available?
Assuming I've understood the issue, and if you don't expect concurrent
writes, consider a BDB.
Also, these may or may not
I expect this isn't the best way to ask this, but this is where the
dbsettings saga has played out so far, and you guys have a good idea
of what I'm trying to do, so I'm asking anyway.
The biggest hurdle to dbsettings at this point is that it caches
settings in a standard Python module, which
23 matches
Mail list logo
