On Monday, June 23, 2014 5:54:38 PM UTC+2, Lie Ryan wrote:
> If you don't want each thread to have their own copy of the object,
>
> Don't use thread-scoped session. Use explicit scope instead.
How would that work when multiple threads traverse the in-memory object
structure and cause relation
memcache (or redis or ...) would be an option. However, I'm not going to go
through the network plus deserialization for every object, that'd be too slow -
thus I'd still need a local cache - which needs to be invalidated.
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Sunday, June 22, 2014 3:49:53 PM UTC+2, Roy Smith wrote:
> Can you give us some more quantitative idea of your requirements? How
> many objects? How much total data is being stored? How many queries
> per second, and what is the acceptable latency for a query?
Not yet, A whole lot, More t
My problem: I have a large database of interconnected objects which I need to
process with a combination of short- and long-lived workers. These objects are
mostly read-only (i.e. any of them can be changed/marked-as-deleted, but that
happens infrequently). The workers may or may not be within o
