On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 15:58, Jon Nelson jnel...@jamponi.net wrote:
Revised to use:
for row in rows:
dict(row) # throw away result
count += 1
I wonder how this could even work... iterating over the row yields
individual values, not tuples?!
I wonder what kind of column types you are
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 19:52, Jon Nelson jnel...@jamponi.net wrote:
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 12:01 PM, Michael Bayer
mike...@zzzcomputing.com wrote:
On Dec 15, 2011, at 12:51 PM, Jon Nelson wrote:
Up front, I'm not using the ORM at all, and I'm using SQLAlchemy 0.7.4
with psycopg2 2.4.3 on
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 3:30 AM, Gaëtan de Menten gdemen...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 19:52, Jon Nelson jnel...@jamponi.net wrote:
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 12:01 PM, Michael Bayer
mike...@zzzcomputing.com wrote:
On Dec 15, 2011, at 12:51 PM, Jon Nelson wrote:
Up front, I'm not
On Dec 15, 2011, at 12:51 PM, Jon Nelson wrote:
Up front, I'm not using the ORM at all, and I'm using SQLAlchemy 0.7.4
with psycopg2 2.4.3 on PostgreSQL 8.4.10 on Linux x86_64.
I did some performance testing. Selecting 75 million rows (a straight
up SELECT colA from tableA) from a 5GB
On Dec 15, 2011, at 1:01 PM, Michael Bayer wrote:
haven't clocked it but a source inspection indicates Python's would be much
slower, as it's going for much more correct and comprehensive behavior
using a linked list.
Here's our __iter__() (self._list is a native Python list):
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 12:01 PM, Michael Bayer
mike...@zzzcomputing.com wrote:
On Dec 15, 2011, at 12:51 PM, Jon Nelson wrote:
Up front, I'm not using the ORM at all, and I'm using SQLAlchemy 0.7.4
with psycopg2 2.4.3 on PostgreSQL 8.4.10 on Linux x86_64.
I did some performance testing.
