From: Gary Wilson <gary.wil...@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 00:54:46 -0500
Local: Tues, Jun 26 2007 1:54 am
Subject: Re: GSoC 2007 - Object-Level Caching
Getting back into the swing of things...
Paul Collier wrote: I could see how (2) would be desirable if you are expecting >> If I update o1 in some other part of the >> code, what assumptions are made about qs? > Hmm, yeah... I haven't focused enough attention on .cache_set() yet, > heheh. I was definitely just going to implement (1) first, and then > worry about something more advanced once I got to the "smart" > functionality (which I might just be making default behaviour now). At > some point I'll be writing a class with which cached queries register > so that pre/post_save signals can freshen the cache; that's should > lightweight enough to scale by itself, but to implement (3) I guess > it'd also have to track which PKs are present. I'm not really sure if > (2) is desirable. qs.cache_set() to work like cache.set('myqs', qs), which is how I interpreted your proposal. Though, I could also understand someone wanting one of the other implementations too. So what were your implementation thoughts about cache_set()? It appears As far as cache correctness and the pre_save/post_save signals for Also, all this object caching seems to me like something that would tie class Author: class AuthorCacheOptions(cache.ModelOptions): Now, Author query sets using .cache() would use the AuthorCacheOptions Gary You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
| ||||||||||||||