On Tuesday, February 11, 2014 5:31:35 AM UTC+2, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 2:02 PM, Asaf Las wrote:
>
> > On Tuesday, February 11, 2014 4:57:30 AM UTC+2, Walter Hurry wrote:
> >> Chris Angelico wrote:
> >> >
> >> > And definitely don't go for a non-free option (MS-SQL, DB2, e
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 2:02 PM, Asaf Las wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 11, 2014 4:57:30 AM UTC+2, Walter Hurry wrote:
>> Chris Angelico wrote:
>> >
>> > And definitely don't go for a non-free option (MS-SQL, DB2, etc)
>> > unless you've looked into it really closely and you are absolutely
>> > th
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 1:57 PM, Walter Hurry wrote:
> Chris Angelico wrote:
>
>> Broad recommendation: Single application, tiny workload, concurrency
>> not an issue, simplicity desired? Go SQLite. Big complex job, need
>> performance, lots of things reading and writing at once, want
>> networked
On Tuesday, February 11, 2014 4:57:30 AM UTC+2, Walter Hurry wrote:
> Chris Angelico wrote:
> >
> > And definitely don't go for a non-free option (MS-SQL, DB2, etc)
> > unless you've looked into it really closely and you are absolutely
> > thoroughly *sure* that you need that system (which probably
Chris Angelico wrote:
> Broad recommendation: Single application, tiny workload, concurrency
> not an issue, simplicity desired? Go SQLite. Big complex job, need
> performance, lots of things reading and writing at once, want
> networked access? Go PGSQL. And don't go MySQL if PG is an option.
>
>
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 2:40 AM, Dennis Lee Bieber
wrote:
> Any opinion on Firebird? Just curiosity given how often the advice
> seems to be "start with SQLite, avoid MySQL, end with PostgreSQL"
No, because I've never used it. Has anyone here? What are its
strengths and weaknesses?
Chris
On 2014-02-09 22:00, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 9:20 PM, Marcel Rodrigues
> wrote:
> > As Chris said, if your needs are simple, use SQLite back-end.
> > It's probably already installed on your computer and Python has a
> > nice interface to it in its standard library.
>
> Al
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 12:27 AM, Asaf Las wrote:
> i did it just to test sqlite3 behavior and actually test was related to
> simulation of unique incremental sequence number/counter for
> independently spawned tasks accessing counter in non deterministic manner.
Sure. I would expect that you'd
On Sunday, February 9, 2014 3:14:50 PM UTC+2, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 11:47 PM, Asaf Las wrote:
>
Thanks
>
> Also, you're connecting and disconnecting repeatedly... oh, I see why
> it didn't work when I tried. You're also using two completely
> different database names:
On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 11:47 PM, Asaf Las wrote:
> i simply tested running 2 independent processes started at same time in
> parallel towards same sqlite database and never get 2 in that row
> though used exclusive lock on DB. might be i did something wrong.
The threading locks aren't doing a
On Sunday, February 9, 2014 1:00:58 PM UTC+2, Chris Angelico wrote:
> The biggest downside of SQLite3 is concurrency. I haven't dug into the
> exact details of the pager system and such, but it seems to be fairly
> coarse in its locking. Also, stuff gets a bit complicated when you do
> a single tra
On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 11:04 PM, Marcel Rodrigues wrote:
> I just checked in the Python sources and apparently you're right about
> SQLite3. The Python distribution includes pysqlite which seems to be a
> self-contained SQLite engine. No external dependencies. Sorry for the
> confusion.
Comes to
I just checked in the Python sources and apparently you're right about
SQLite3. The Python distribution includes pysqlite which seems to be a
self-contained SQLite engine. No external dependencies. Sorry for the
confusion.
2014-02-09 9:00 GMT-02:00 Chris Angelico :
> On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 9:20
On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 9:20 PM, Marcel Rodrigues wrote:
> As Chris said, if your needs are simple, use SQLite back-end. It's probably
> already installed on your computer and Python has a nice interface to it in
> its standard library.
Already installed? I thought the point of SQLite3 being in th
As Chris said, if your needs are simple, use SQLite back-end. It's probably
already installed on your computer and Python has a nice interface to it in
its standard library. [1]
If you decide to use MySQL back-end instead, consider using PyMySQL [2].
It's compatible with both Python 2 and Python 3
On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 7:55 PM, Sam wrote:
> Is MySQLdb the recommended python module for SQL database access? Are there
> other modules? What I want in a module is to be able to write readable and
> maintainable code.
>
As long as you use some module that speaks the Python Database API
(PEP 24
Is MySQLdb the recommended python module for SQL database access? Are there
other modules? What I want in a module is to be able to write readable and
maintainable code.
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
17 matches
Mail list logo
