aahz at pythoncraft.com
Mon Jun 15 17:37:19 CEST 2009
In article <79mtt7F1r4807U1 at mid.uni-berlin.de>,
Diez B. Roggisch <deets at nospam.web.de> wrote:
>Aaron Brady wrote:
>> Some time ago, I recommended a pursuit of keeping 'persistent
>> composite' types on disk, to be read and updated at other times by
>> other processes. Databases provide this functionality, with the
>> exception that field types in any given table are required to be
>> uniform. Python has no such restriction.
>> I tried out an implementation of composite collections, specifically
>> lists, sets, and dicts, using 'sqlite3' as a persistence back-end.
>> It's significantly slower, but we might argue that attempting to do it
>> by hand classifies as a premature optimization; it is easy to optimize
>> debugged code.
>Sounds like you are re-inventing the ZODB.
...or SQLAlchemy or pickles in a SQL BLOB or...
Aahz (aahz at pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/
"Many customs in this life persist because they ease friction and promote
productivity as a result of universal agreement, and whether they are
precisely the optimal choices is much less important." --Henry Spencer
More information about the Python-list