Dan Nessett wrote: > Platonides wrote: >> Dan Nessett wrote: >>>> What about memcached? >>>> (that would be a key based on the original db name) >>> >>> The storage has to be persistent to accommodate wiki crashes (e.g., >>> httpd crash, server OS crash, power outage). It might be possible to >>> use memcachedb, but as far as I am aware that requires installing >>> Berkeley DB, which complicated deployment. >>> >>> Why not employ the already installed DB software used by the wiki? That >>> provides persistent storage and requires no additional software. >> >> My original idea was to use whatever ObjectCache the wiki used, but it >> could be forced to use the db as backend (that's the objectcache table). > > My familiarity with the ObjectCache is casual. I presume it holds data > that is set on particular wiki access requests and that data is then used > on subsequent requests to make them more efficient. If so, then using a > common ObjectCache for all concurrent test runs would cause interference > between them. To ensure such interference doesn't exist, we would need to > switch in a per-test-run ObjectCache (which takes us back to the idea of > using a per-test-run db, since the ObjectCache is implemented using the > objectcache table).
You load originaldb.objectcache, retrieve the specific configuration, and switch into it. For supporting many sumyltaneous configurations, the keyname could have the instance (whatever that cookie is set to) appended, although those dynamic configurations make me a bit nervous. _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
