On Jun 2, 2010, at 1:47 PM, Jason Baker wrote: > On May 30, 8:39 pm, Michael Bayer <[email protected]> wrote: >> OK well by re018792aea57 I've bumped the callcounts down a *little*, >> reducing compiler overhead within the flush(). Perhaps it will be a >> bigger difference for your app which seems to be heavy on flush() calls. > > As it turns out, that change didn't help much at all. :-/ > > However, performance might not be as big an issue as I suspected. It > turns out the code I've been working with is now much faster since > using SQLAlchemy. We are perhaps taking a bit more CPU time than we > were before, but SQLAlchemy has given us much greater flexibility to > write efficient queries.
so you're saying, once you ported your code to use SQLA's featureset fully, then you were OK, right ? Well yeah, that is how it works ! Better queries take the load off your app *and* the DB. Mailing list traffic piles up that much more since everyone's learning how to write bigger queries :). -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sqlalchemy" 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/sqlalchemy?hl=en.
