sorry, hopefully I can explain in better detail :) I have a list of keywords in a table that's the size of thousands. It changes, but not very often, so the list doesn't have to be updated all that often.
When I receive a body of text, I want to highlight the keywords in the body of text. So I have to constantly compare the body of text to my keywords. Because of that, I think querying would be too large a hit on the database. So I have a working version where I store in memcache keywords sharded by letter, for example storing all keywords starting with the letter 'A', and so forth. This is a temporary fix that will work for now but will cause problems later as my keywords exceed 1000 per letter. Not only that, when the memcache gets disposed, the user will have to query to populate that memcache, which could take a really long time for that unlucky person who has to populate the memcache for everybody else. So looking for a better version of what I'm currently doing. On Dec 16, 5:12 am, "Nick Johnson (Google)" <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > It's difficult to comment usefully without more information. Where do you > get your list from? How is it calculated? How large is it? > > -Nick Johnson > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 11:11 PM, killer barney <[email protected]> wrote: > > I have a question that perhaps someone can give me some insight on. > > > I have a list of thousands of keywords in my website that I am going > > to constantly need to query and iterate through. So I thought rather > > than querying for every keyword in the datastore everytime, I should > > store it in the memcache. But even this doesn't seem like a very good > > solution as the memcache gets eliminated and I'm going to have to > > somehow query the whole list and store it back into memcache everytime > > it gets disposed of. > > > I thought about having the list stored as sharded arrays into > > memcache, so when it does get disposed of, then I only have to update > > the keywords that start with "N", for example, but this still doesn't > > seem like the best solution. > > > Is there a better way to do this? > > > -- > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "Google App Engine" group. > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > [email protected]<google-appengine%2Bunsubscrib > > [email protected]> > > . > > For more options, visit this group at > >http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en. > > -- > Nick Johnson, Developer Programs Engineer, App Engine > Google Ireland Ltd. :: Registered in Dublin, Ireland, Registration Number: > 368047 > > -- > Nick Johnson, Developer Programs Engineer, App Engine > Google Ireland Ltd. :: Registered in Dublin, Ireland, Registration Number: > 368047 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
