simultaneous multiple requests to very simple database

Stephen Thorne stephen.thorne at gmail.com
Tue Jan 18 23:47:16 CET 2005


On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 17:33:26 -0500, Eric S. Johansson <esj at harvee.org> wrote:
> so in conclusion, my only reason for querying was to see if I was
> missing a solution.  So far, I have not found any work using because
> they add orders of magnitude more complexity than simple dbm with file
> locking.  Obviously, the simple solution has horrible performance right
> now I need simplicity implementation.
> 
> thanks for your commentary.

Maybe you can just get the best of both worlds.

Have a look at SQLObject. You can ignore the fact that underneath the
SQLObject there's a postgres (or mysql, or whatever) database, and get
OO based persistance.

SQLObject is crippled in that there are degrees of freedom that SQL
gives you that SQLObject takes away/makes hard to use, but what you're
trying to do, and what most people actually do with databases, can be
easily wrapped around with a simple, pythonic wrapper.

It even has a .createTable() function for those times when you don't
even want to log into the database.

Regards,
Stephen Thorne.



More information about the Python-list mailing list