On 23/06/14 19:05, smur...@gmail.com wrote:
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-me
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
Hi,
William Ray Wing:
> Are you sure it won’t fit in memory? Default server memory configs these
> days tend to start at 128 Gig, and scale to 256 or 384 Gig.
>
I am not going to buy a new server. I can justify writing a lot of custom
code for that kind of money.
Besides, the time to actually
On 22/06/14 10:46, smur...@gmail.com wrote:
I've been doing this with a "classic" session-based SQLAlchemy ORM, approach,
but that ends up way too slow and memory intense, as each thread gets its own copy of
every object it needs. I don't want that.
If you don't want each thread to have thei
In article ,
William Ray Wing wrote:
> On Jun 23, 2014, at 12:26 AM, smur...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > 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 stor
On Jun 23, 2014, at 12:26 AM, smur...@gmail.com wrote:
> 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 th
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
In article <85659fdd-511b-4aea-9c4b-17a4bbb88...@googlegroups.com>,
smur...@gmail.com wrote:
> 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
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
10 matches
Mail list logo
