From my understanding, this should be safe with Twisted:
- SqlAlchemy engine operations, where you don't use the ORM and
encapsulate every ansync chunk in a transaction, and within a thread
- SqlAlchemy orm operations, where every async chunk is encapsulated in
it's own session, and within a
On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 12:01 PM, Jonathan Vanasco jonat...@findmeon.com wrote:
so the popular workaround(s) are to do both:
1- defer to thread (which most people would do anyways)
2- open/close multiple sessions (which are cheap). basically , instead of
approaching a task in twisted as a
On Monday, October 7, 2013 8:27:34 PM UTC-4, Klauss wrote:
3- open a single request-scope session, and carry it through your async
tasks.
I left that out, because it brings up the problem where your long-running
session blocks the database (via transactions) or if you're in some
Thanks guys. Jonathan, that is, I think, what will be going on.
So, I'm not quite clear from your comments, using SQLAlchemy with Twisted
is practical now or not? Is it better to do it with Twisted than with
Gevent?
If you have the time to explain further about the persisting the session
comment
So the No SqlAlchemy with Twisted approach is dated.
I've been on the twisted list for a while, and recently asked it -- as i
have a bit of stuff for the same project running in twisted as-well-as
pyramid and-also celery.
The current consensus is that it's a general no-go/bad-idea if you're
Also, a decent strategy to use is this:
a) Your client does a lot of business logic in Pyramid. When you need to
bill you hit an internal API or create a celery task
b) You render a waiting page, and have ajax, or refresh, check to see if
the internal API , or celery, is done processing
c)
