Fair enough about the example stuff; I kind of figured, but thought I'd just share my experience. It's such a fine-line between authors getting a bead on real-world usage vs. hearing the same question over and over again.
Previously, I had it just using the "binds" that were in the Query, but we > had cases where bound parameters were embedded in the statement too > affecting things. So as a quick fix I changed it to just traverse the > whole statement, but this can be optimized significantly more than it is. > It's the way it is so that it "works" more completely on the first > go-around. Is there a thread I can pull at here? I'd love to here about performant key generation options that are more flexible than explicit cache keys (obviously that is highly prone to developer error). Looking at the query class, I'm guessing you are still using md5(unicode(query.statement)) for the query portion of the key, but what are you using for "binds"? (Sorry, not quite familiar with the internals of SQLAlchemy yet -- and I can't find that attribute or anything similar in the source) Are there other alternatives for cache keys that are worth exploring? (and feel free to just post links or what have you, I'm happy to do the reading) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sqlalchemy" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sqlalchemy/-/JvefOSuw1FwJ. To post to this group, send email to sqlalchemy@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sqlalchemy+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sqlalchemy?hl=en.
