Sorry, I thought I had -- it works like a champ. Would be nice if there
were a way to mark the signature fields as unindexed w/o having to recreate
them (not as simple as cut and paste, as the table def uses a bunch of
local definitions, but not hard), but definitely workable. And lowers the
index overhead a LOT; in my case, from 15K to <3K.
- Scott
On Thursday, February 28, 2013 11:12:52 AM UTC-5, howesc wrote:
>
> can you let me know if it works as desired now? if so, i'll submit the
> patch to massimo for review and possible inclusion in the next release of
> web2py.
>
> thanks,
>
> cfh
>
> On Tuesday, February 26, 2013 6:31:52 PM UTC-8, Scott Hunter wrote:
>>
>> With the latest patch, I was able to disable indices on the string fields
>> I wanted to. Unfortunately (for me), I've just about used up my quota, so
>> I'll have to wait until tomorrow to see how much doing so saves me.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Scott
>>
>> On Tuesday, February 26, 2013 8:50:29 PM UTC-5, howesc wrote:
>>>
>>> here's an updated DAL patch to try.....
>>>
>>> thanks for trudging through this with us!
>>>
>>> cfh
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, February 26, 2013 3:36:30 PM UTC-8, Scott Hunter wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I'm working from Version 2.3.2 (2012-12-17 15:03:30) stable
>>>>
>>>> Here's the table in question (I've commented-out the custom_qualifier
>>>> for the string fields):
>>>>
>>>> db.define_table('t_run',
>>>> Field('f_trial', type='reference t_trial',
>>>> label=T('Trial')),
>>>> Field('f_when', type='date',
>>>> label=T('When')),
>>>> Field('f_dog', type='reference t_dog',
>>>> label=T('Dog')),
>>>> Field('f_name', type='string',#custom_qualifier={'indexed':False},
>>>> label=T('Name')),
>>>> Field('f_breed', type='string',#custom_qualifier={'indexed':False},
>>>> label=T('Breed')),
>>>> Field('f_jump_height', type='integer',custom_qualifier={'indexed':
>>>> False},
>>>> label=T('Jump Height')),
>>>> Field('f_level', type='string',#custom_qualifier={'indexed':False},
>>>> label=T('Level')),
>>>> Field('f_class', type='string',#custom_qualifier={'indexed':False},
>>>> label=T('Class')),
>>>> Field('f_pref', type='boolean',custom_qualifier={'indexed':False},
>>>> label=T('Preferred')),
>>>> Field('f_armband', type='string',
>>>> #custom_qualifier={'indexed':False},
>>>> label=T('Armband')),
>>>> Field('f_yards', type='integer',custom_qualifier={'indexed':False},
>>>> label=T('Yards')),
>>>> Field('f_sct', type='integer',custom_qualifier={'indexed':False},
>>>> label=T('SCT')),
>>>> Field('f_judge', type='string',#custom_qualifier={'indexed':False},
>>>> label=T('Judge')),
>>>> Field('f_score', type='integer',custom_qualifier={'indexed':False},
>>>> label=T('Score')),
>>>> Field('f_time', type='double',custom_qualifier={'indexed':False},
>>>> label=T('Time')),
>>>> Field('f_faults', type='string',
>>>> #custom_qualifier={'indexed':False},
>>>> label=T('Faults')),
>>>> Field('f_handler', type='string',
>>>> #custom_qualifier={'indexed':False},
>>>> label=T('Handler')),
>>>> Field('f_order', type='integer',
>>>> label=T('Order')),
>>>> auth.signature,
>>>> format='%(f_key)s',
>>>> migrate=settings.migrate)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> P.S. Turning off the indexes DOES make a difference; with the changes
>>>> above, instead of using up over 30% of my quota, I'm "only" using 23%. If
>>>> I can get the strings unindexed, and take out the web2py-supplied fields
>>>> (created_by & _on, modified_by & _on, and maybe is_active), that should
>>>> get
>>>> it down to something manageable. (Not clear on how to handle the
>>>> web2py-supplied fields, as I don't know what parameters were using in
>>>> making them, making it difficult to know just how to "supply my own
>>>> definitions".)
>>>>
>>>> On Tuesday, February 26, 2013 6:24:21 PM UTC-5, howesc wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> your line numbers are off from mine so i'm having trouble making sense
>>>>> of this. :(
>>>>>
>>>>> can you send your model definition so i can see what you are working
>>>>> with? i think then i can line it up with the dal version i have here
>>>>> (which was trunk from HG as of saturday AM PST)
>>>>>
>>>>> cfh
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tuesday, February 26, 2013 3:18:13 PM UTC-8, Scott Hunter wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sorry about that. I've fixed it, and now I get the following:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In FILE: /base/data/home/apps/s~sbhweb2py/1.365574604253984974/
>>>>>> applications/ppt_demo/models/db_wizard.py
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Traceback (most recent call last):
>>>>>> File
>>>>>> "/base/data/home/apps/s~sbhweb2py/1.365574604253984974/gluon/restricted.py"
>>>>>> , line 212, in restricted
>>>>>> exec ccode in environment
>>>>>> File
>>>>>> "/base/data/home/apps/s~sbhweb2py/1.365574604253984974/applications/ppt_demo/models/db_wizard.py"
>>>>>> , line 198, in <module>
>>>>>> migrate=settings.migrate)
>>>>>> File
>>>>>> "/base/data/home/apps/s~sbhweb2py/1.365574604253984974/gluon/dal.py",line
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 7189, in define_table
>>>>>> table = self.lazy_define_table(tablename,*fields,**args)
>>>>>> File
>>>>>> "/base/data/home/apps/s~sbhweb2py/1.365574604253984974/gluon/dal.py",line
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 7225, in lazy_define_table
>>>>>> polymodel=polymodel)
>>>>>> File
>>>>>> "/base/data/home/apps/s~sbhweb2py/1.365574604253984974/gluon/dal.py",line
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 4368, in create_table
>>>>>> ftype = self.types[field_type](**attr)
>>>>>> TypeError: <lambda>() takes no arguments (1 given)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This only happens if one of the fields in question is a string; I get
>>>>>> no error when the unindexed fields are all integer, boolean or double.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Scott
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tuesday, February 26, 2013 1:04:12 AM UTC-5, howesc wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> it looks like you have a typo.... "custom_qualifer" vs
>>>>>>> "custom_qualifier"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Monday, February 25, 2013 6:44:14 PM UTC-8, Scott Hunter wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I applied the patch, and added custom_qualifiers like so:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Field('f_name', type='string',custom_qualifer={'indexed':False
>>>>>>>> },
>>>>>>>> label=T('Name')),
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> and this is the error I got:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In FILE: /base/data/home/apps/s~sbhweb2py/1.365567821359373728/
>>>>>>>> applications/ppt_demo/models/db_wizard.py
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Traceback (most recent call last):
>>>>>>>> File
>>>>>>>> "/base/data/home/apps/s~sbhweb2py/1.365567821359373728/gluon/restricted.py"
>>>>>>>> , line 212, in restricted
>>>>>>>> exec ccode in environment
>>>>>>>> File
>>>>>>>> "/base/data/home/apps/s~sbhweb2py/1.365567821359373728/applications/ppt_demo/models/db_wizard.py"
>>>>>>>> , line 165, in <module>
>>>>>>>> label=T('Name')),
>>>>>>>> TypeError: __init__() got an unexpected keyword argument
>>>>>>>> 'custom_qualifer'
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Saturday, February 23, 2013 12:30:48 PM UTC-5, howesc wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Scott,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> this is *completely* untested, but here's a proposal:
>>>>>>>>> - use the (undocumented) field.custom_qualifier property in GAE
>>>>>>>>> field definitions
>>>>>>>>> - if you want a field to be unindexed set
>>>>>>>>> custom_qualifier={'indexed':False}
>>>>>>>>> - for "properties that don't get listed explicitly"....override
>>>>>>>>> those default properties with what you want (there are a few
>>>>>>>>> techniques for
>>>>>>>>> not explicitly listing fields, depending on which technique you are
>>>>>>>>> using
>>>>>>>>> the answer here is different.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> this patch against HG trunk this AM might work (i say might cause
>>>>>>>>> i have not tested it). are you willing to experiment with it and let
>>>>>>>>> us
>>>>>>>>> know?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> thanks,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> christian
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Friday, February 22, 2013 3:53:33 PM UTC-8, Scott Hunter wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If I had to guess, I'd say a patch is needed in the loop over the
>>>>>>>>>> fields in create_table, that would add a new entry to the dict for
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> field definition based on a new attribute (which would be ignored
>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>> anything other than Google's Datastore) which gets added to
>>>>>>>>>> sql_fields;
>>>>>>>>>> then migrate_table, which seems to build the table building/altering
>>>>>>>>>> commands would need to be made to recognize the new entry & add the
>>>>>>>>>> disable
>>>>>>>>>> index command. There's not a lot of comments in the code, and I'd
>>>>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>>>> afraid to break something, but might give it a try.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> - Scott
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> P.S. Not sure of the best way to handle this (what's describe
>>>>>>>>>> above wouldn't handle it), but it would be nice to be able to turn
>>>>>>>>>> off the
>>>>>>>>>> indexes for the fields that don't get listed explicitly in
>>>>>>>>>> models.db
>>>>>>>>>> (things like created by & when, modified by & when).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Friday, February 22, 2013 6:14:28 PM UTC-5, howesc wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> thanks for the link. i'll try and take a look this weekend and
>>>>>>>>>>> see if there is a place for that in the DAL (feel free to open
>>>>>>>>>>> gluon/dal.py yourself too).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> yup, i'm paying more for writes right now then i am for instance
>>>>>>>>>>> hours per day on my largest paid application. :)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> cfh
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, February 21, 2013 5:59:06 PM UTC-8, Scott Hunter
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> According to
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://developers.google.com/appengine/docs/python/datastore/indexes#Unindexed_Properties,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> "You declare a property unindexed by setting indexed=False in the
>>>>>>>>>>>> property
>>>>>>>>>>>> constructor".
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> One incurs the cost of a write (or 2?) for every property of a
>>>>>>>>>>>> record that gets written; so, for a table with about 25 fields
>>>>>>>>>>>> (once you
>>>>>>>>>>>> include all of the ones web2py adds), inserting 300 records incurs
>>>>>>>>>>>> the cost
>>>>>>>>>>>> of 14K+ writes; as the free account has a limit of 50K writes per
>>>>>>>>>>>> day, that
>>>>>>>>>>>> is rather limiting. It is easy to turn such indicies back on, but
>>>>>>>>>>>> you have
>>>>>>>>>>>> to re-write every record in order to repopulate them.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> - Scott
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, February 21, 2013 4:51:59 PM UTC-5, howesc wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> i'm being lazy here....do you have the instructions (or link
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to instructions) from GAE for disabling indexes? i don't have it
>>>>>>>>>>>>> handy
>>>>>>>>>>>>> right now....
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> we can check if the DAL has a secret way to handle it, and/or
>>>>>>>>>>>>> create a patch to allow it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> may i ask what advantage you are hoping to achieve by skipping
>>>>>>>>>>>>> those indexes? i've left them on for fear of making a bad choice
>>>>>>>>>>>>> that i
>>>>>>>>>>>>> can't revert.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> christian
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, February 21, 2013 5:56:07 AM UTC-8, Scott Hunter
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As I understand it, the GAE datastore will automatically
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> create an index for every field of every table (to facilitate
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> queries using
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> single fields); those requiring multiple fields also get
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> generated, but
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will get added to index.yaml by the SDK when tested locally.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Since these
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are created outside of the DAL, I wouldn't expect to be able to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> remove them
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> using it. I also understand that there is a way, with the GAE
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> SDK, to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> disable the index for any given field (by a parameter in the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> field
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> definition); is there any way to accomplish this through the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> DAL, and if
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so, what is it?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
--
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"web2py-users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
