Okay, Im back at work and got to put some of these suggestions to use.
cPickle is doing a great job a hiking up the serialization rate and
cutting out the +=data helped a lot too. The entire search process now
for this same data set is down to about 4-5 seconds from pressing
'search' to having the
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
> > I guess now I'd like to know what are good practices in general to get
> > better results with sockets on the same local machine. I'm only
> > instantiating two sockets total right now - one client and one server,
> > and the transfer is taking 15 seconds for only 8.3MB.
Thanks for the responses folks. I'm starting to think that there is
merely an inefficiency in how I'm using the sockets. The expensive
part of the program is definitely the socket transfer because I timed
each part of the routine individually. For a small return, the whole
search and return takes a
Paul Rubin wrote:
> dlomsak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > knowledge of the topic to help. If the above are not possible but you
> > have a really good idea for zipping large amounts of data from one
> > program to another, I'd like to hear it.
>
> One che
Hello,
I have searched a good deal about this topic and have not found
any good information yet. It seems that the people asking all want
something a bit different than what I want and also don't divulge much
about their intentions. I wish to improve the rate of data transfer
between two python
