> > Well, that's good, except I thought you couldn't get rid of objects?
>
> Muhahaha. I got those little bastards... :)
That's one way to fix it, I suppose. ;-)
> > Yes, but not with 1,000,000 objects (see
> > lib/python/ZCatalog/tests/testCatalog.py). It would be nice to have
> > such a repo
On Thu, 17 May 2001, Chris McDonough wrote:
> Well, that's good, except I thought you couldn't get rid of objects?
Muhahaha. I got those little bastards... :)
> Yes, but not with 1,000,000 objects (see
> lib/python/ZCatalog/tests/testCatalog.py). It would be nice to have
> such a report.
If
Chris McDonough wrote:
>
> Well, some revision of 2.4 alpha will ship with drop-in indexes, so using it
> would be wonderful.
Lemme know as soon as it's in CVS and I'll see if I can get my Zope from source
going on WinNT, I gave up the last tiem my need came close but Brian has solved
the proble
>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2001 11:38 AM
Subject: Re: [Zope-dev] ZCatalog, REQUEST, misc.
> Chris McDonough wrote:
> >
> >
> > That sounds good! At least for the Catalog. Want to be a tester? ;-)
>
> I would,
Chris McDonough wrote:
>
>
> That sounds good! At least for the Catalog. Want to be a tester? ;-)
I would, especially for drop-in indexes and AND keyword indexes :-)
cheers,
Chris
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.zope.or
> On Thu, 17 May 2001, Chris McDonough wrote:
>
> > I'd be curious to know how long a query that involves only a single
> > field index takes, and how long a query that involves only a single text
> > index takes... does each take a roughly equivalent amount of time?
>
> I might be able to check t
On Thu, 17 May 2001, Chris McDonough wrote:
> I'd be curious to know how long a query that involves only a single
> field index takes, and how long a query that involves only a single text
> index takes... does each take a roughly equivalent amount of time?
I might be able to check that for you
Erik Enge wrote:
> I've indexed about 410.000 objects now. A plain query with 'meta_type'
> and 'firstname' to searchResults takes about 3-4 seconds. Not too bad,
> but not that good either.
I assume meta_type is a field index and 'firstname' is a text index.
I'd be curious to know how long a
On Tue, 15 May 2001, Chris McDonough wrote:
> I'll be curious to see the results. Hopefully you'll have better luck
> under 2.3.1b2.
I've indexed about 410.000 objects now. A plain query with 'meta_type'
and 'firstname' to searchResults takes about 3-4 seconds. Not too bad,
but not that good
> > (it's fairly DWIM-ish as well)
>
> DWIM?
Do What I Mean. ;-)
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
http://lists.zope.org/mailman/l
On Tue, 15 May 2001, Chris McDonough wrote:
> YourCatalog.catalog_object(newobject)
>
> as opposed from inheriting from CatalogAware and relying on manage_afterAdd
> or calling object.index_item() manually. That's really it.
Well, if you put it that way :)
*removing CatalogAwareness*
> (it'
> > Why CatalogAware? You do know that the only thing CatalogAware does
> > is add/remove/reindex objects in one particular Catalog when they're
> > added, removed, or changed?
>
> Yes, and this is all I need. Where is the overhead with CatalogAware
> objects, then?
Any time a parent object is
On Tue, 15 May 2001, Chris McDonough wrote:
> Why CatalogAware? You do know that the only thing CatalogAware does
> is add/remove/reindex objects in one particular Catalog when they're
> added, removed, or changed?
Yes, and this is all I need. Where is the overhead with CatalogAware
objects, t
> > I'd either make my own CatalogAware-alike mixin class that did things
> > a bit differently than CatalogAware (perhaps didn't index on add, and
> > didn't unindex on delete), or I'd just manage the whole lot completely
> > manually. (How often will each of these million objects change?)
>
> No
On Tue, 15 May 2001, Chris McDonough wrote:
> Probably not much difference on bare bulk indexing speed, but I'll bet
> that it finishes this time. ;-)
We'll see :)
> I'd either make my own CatalogAware-alike mixin class that did things
> a bit differently than CatalogAware (perhaps didn't inde
On Tue, 15 May 2001, Chris Withers wrote:
> Why nto go for 2.3.2 final? IIRC, 2.3.2b2 had some nasty ZCatalog bugs
> in it...
Heh, that's what I get for not keeping up; I didn't even know 2.3.2 final
was out. Bleh. :-)
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EM
> Thanks for the fast reply!
>
> On Tue, 15 May 2001, Chris McDonough wrote:
>
> > Have you read
> > http://www.zope.org/Members/mcdonc/HowTos/UpgradeToNewCatalog/index_html
> > ? I suspect there will be improvement.
>
> Surely there will be improvement, but not of factors two or three, or
> more?
Erik Enge wrote:
>
> This is Zope 2.3.1b1, by the way. I'm changing to Zope 2.3.2b2 as we
> speak, but I don't think it will improve performance that much.
Why nto go for 2.3.2 final? IIRC, 2.3.2b2 had some nasty ZCatalog bugs in it...
cheers,
Chris
__
Thanks for the fast reply!
On Tue, 15 May 2001, Chris McDonough wrote:
> Have you read
> http://www.zope.org/Members/mcdonc/HowTos/UpgradeToNewCatalog/index_html
> ? I suspect there will be improvement.
Surely there will be improvement, but not of factors two or three, or
more?
And, I can do t
> I have a 1GHz Pentium with 1GB RAM and 1GB swap. After
> I added all the objects with a little script (that took about 12 hours), I
> was going to index them to the Catalog I have. (I had to uncomment the
> index_object method's innards in CatalogAwareness.py because of a problem
> I mention fu
Hi.
I was adding a couple of objects to my system. Turns out, it's over a
million of them. I have a 1GHz Pentium with 1GB RAM and 1GB swap. After
I added all the objects with a little script (that took about 12 hours), I
was going to index them to the Catalog I have. (I had to uncomment the
in
21 matches
Mail list logo
