I see, I'm guessing it probably isn't worth it to optimize this particular area but it's good to know that the multithreading ability would work in a more complex instance where I truly needed the parallelism.
One last question on the topic, having to do with threadsafe: the function that I was referring to was actually a decorator that checks certain permissions that I insert before a large amount of handlers. It also stores the returned objects via self.permissions for example. Is there a possibility of a race condition on self.permissions or does it function in such a manner that this is impossible? Thanks, Richard On Nov 22, 1:56 pm, Brian Quinlan <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 8:48 AM, Richard Arrano <[email protected]> wrote: > > @Brandon: > > This is true but it just would take a lot of rewriting that may or may > > not be worth it. > > > @Brian > > Thanks for the tip, I didn't even realize that(I haven't been using > > AppStats, shame on me). Would the savings be worth it, in your > > opinion, when they're not present in the cache and have to resort to 3 > > gets of varying size? > > Its hard to give advice on this kind of complexity vs. performance > trade-off without really understanding the application. > > Datastore gets are slower than memcache gets but are still pretty quick. > > Cheers, > Brian > > > > > > > > > On Nov 22, 12:37 pm, Brian Quinlan <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Richard, > > >> On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 7:18 AM, Richard Arrano <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > Hello, > >> > Quick question regarding multithreading in Python 2.7: > >> > I have some requests that call 2-3 functions that call the memcache in > >> > each function. It would be possible but quite complicated to just use > >> > get_multi, and I was wondering if I could simply put each function > >> > into a thread and run the 2-3 threads to achieve some parallelism. > >> > Would this work or am I misunderstood about what we can and cannot do > >> > with regards to multithreading in 2.7? > > >> This will certainly work put I'm not sure that it would be worth the > >> complexity. > > >> Fetching a value from memcache usually takes <5ms so parallelizing 3 > >> memcache gets is going to save you ~10ms. > > >> Cheers, > >> Brian > > >> > Thanks, > >> > Richard > > >> > -- > >> > 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 > >> > athttp://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en. > > > -- > > 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 > > athttp://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en. -- 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.
