Re: [google-appengine] Re: Memcache doesn't work

2011-11-22 Thread Deepak Singh
Here the doc says that the object graph can be serialised with some limitations. However i think i would be able to store the List object and get it back. I would give it a try and see what happens. On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 2:03 AM, Jeff Schnitzer wrote: > No, that won't work. > > Seriously, t

Re: [google-appengine] Re: Memcache doesn't work

2011-11-22 Thread Jeff Schnitzer
No, that won't work. Seriously, this is all spelled out in the manual. It took a lot of time and effort to write - please read it: http://code.google.com/p/objectify-appengine/wiki/IntroductionToObjectify Jeff On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 4:24 PM, Deepak Singh wrote: > you mean to say > > @Seriali

Re: [google-appengine] Re: Memcache doesn't work

2011-11-22 Thread Deepak Singh
you mean to say @Serialised public class City implements Serialisable { private string name; private string id; // getter setter } List list = somemethod(); Objectify obj = ObjectifyService.begin(); obj.put(list); So the above code will be able to put list object as serialised

Re: [google-appengine] Re: Memcache doesn't work

2011-11-22 Thread Simon Knott
Sorry, I've actually just gone back and followed your last few messages. If you are really going to go down the route of persisting it to the datastore (and I still think that's wrong), then create a completely new Entity type. e.g. public class CityData { public static final String ALL_CITIE

Re: [google-appengine] Re: Memcache doesn't work

2011-11-22 Thread Simon Knott
Just annotate it as @Serialized -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-appengine/-/X7FiDN1gWMkJ. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine

Re: [google-appengine] Re: Memcache doesn't work

2011-11-22 Thread Deepak Singh
I am using Objectify 3.0.* On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 1:32 AM, Simon Knott wrote: > What persistence framework are you using? > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Google App Engine" group. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups

Re: [google-appengine] Re: Memcache doesn't work

2011-11-22 Thread Simon Knott
What persistence framework are you using? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-appengine/-/Dcm2VWTxzfEJ. To post to this group, send email to google

Re: [google-appengine] Re: Memcache doesn't work

2011-11-22 Thread Deepak Singh
it is less than 1 MB. it is around 120kb. but how to store it in datastore . On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 1:12 AM, Timofey Koolin wrote: > If it more than 1MB you can zip it or split to 2-3 entities. > > > 2011/11/22 Deepak Singh > >> In anycase i have to have these 6500 entities for each user se

Re: [google-appengine] Re: Memcache doesn't work

2011-11-22 Thread Timofey Koolin
If it more than 1MB you can zip it or split to 2-3 entities. 2011/11/22 Deepak Singh > In anycase i have to have these 6500 entities for each user session. > > Now i want to store it as serialised data in datastore. > > public class City implements Serialisable{ > private string cityname; >

Re: [google-appengine] Re: Memcache doesn't work

2011-11-22 Thread Deepak Singh
In anycase i have to have these 6500 entities for each user session. Now i want to store it as serialised data in datastore. public class City implements Serialisable{ private string cityname; private string cityid; // getter setter } now i have these 6500 entities added to a li

[google-appengine] Re: Memcache doesn't work

2011-11-21 Thread Andrei Volgin
1. If you absolutely have to have all 6,500 city names for each user session, I would put them in a separate JavaScript file, stick a reference to it at the bottom of your app page, and host this file somewhere outside of GAE to save a bit of money. This file will be cached by browsers, so that ret