Exactly, hardcron checks once a minute, softcron checks on each page load. The 'check' is calling a function or two and comparing a file's timestamp, so not *that* much more expensive.
On Apr 1, 7:51 pm, Jonathan Lundell <[email protected]> wrote: > On Apr 1, 2010, at 10:37 AM, AchipA wrote: > > > There is some overhead, but efficiency is a disputable term - there is > > certainly more overhead than hardcron, but IMO not in a way that would > > affect overall performance unless you're running it on a site that has > > hundreds of thousands of hits per day... > > Perhaps we could change (or eliminate) the wording. How about simply 'Using > softcron'? > > I'm curious: what is the extra overhead of soft vs hard cron? Just that it > does a test on each page access? I'm guessing that's pretty cheap. > > > > > On Apr 1, 5:40 pm, Jonathan Lundell <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Section 4.17 (cron) mentions hard vs soft cron defaults, but doesn't say > >> how to override them. > > >> Section 4.1 (cli) doesn't list --softcron > > >> The startup message for soft cron says: 'Using softcron (but this is not > >> very efficient)' > > >> In what sense "not efficient"? I understand that the timing is less > >> consistent, but is there really more overhead? softcron seems like a > >> pretty reasonable choice if all you're doing it deleting expired sessions. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "web2py-users" 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/web2py?hl=en.
