On 20 Jul 2010 at 15:07, Peter17 wrote:
> I am currently working on interwiki transclusion [1].
>
> In the proposed approach, we currently retrieve distant templates:
> 1) using wfGetLB('wikiid')->getConnection if the distant wiki has a
> wikiid in the interwiki table
> 2) using the API in the opposite case
>
> In case 1, it seems that retrieving a template from a distant DB is
> just as expensive as retrieving it from the local DB. So, we don't
> store the wikitext of the template locally.
>
> In case 2, the retrieved wikitext is cached in the transcache table
> for an arbitrary time.
>
> I have two questions about this system:
> * Is it better to use the transcache table or to use memcached for the
> API-retrieved remplates?
> * Should we cache the DB-retrieved templates with memcached?
>
> An advantage of memcached here is that it is shared by all the WMF
> wikis, whereas the transcache table is owned by a wiki for itself.
>
> Thanks in advance
>
> Best regards
>
> --
> Peter Potrowl
> http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Peter17
>
>
> [1]
> http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Peter17/Reasonably_efficient_interwiki_transclusion
>
A question for you Peter (and I have no opinion or knowledge on your question)
about your
project.
At Wikisource, we undertake a lot of transclusion, and a fair amount of it
utilising
Sanbeg's Extension:Labeled Section Transclusion [2]. Do you see that this may
be part of
what you are looking towards, or is it solely templates?
My reason for asking is that it would be possible to identify components of WS
works where
one may wish to incorporate part of a page into a page at another wiki.
I also see that there is scope for further display of the same texts in
different
translations.
Regards, Andrew
[2] http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Labeled_section_transclusion
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
