On Apr 14, 2006, at 1:45 PM, Dieter Maurer wrote:

Tim Peters wrote at 2006-4-13 19:44 -0400:
...
Beyond that, it requires someone to try
it.  I'm reminded that when the MEMS Exchange wrote Durus (a kind of
"ZODB lite" ;-):

   http://www.mems-exchange.org/software/durus/

)

they left their entire BTree implementation coded in Python -- it was
"fast enough" that way.

I can tell you from experience that for cataloguing purposes
a C implementation is vital:

   My C based "IncrementalSearch2"
   performs large "or" queries two orders of magnitude faster
   than the Python based "IncrementalSearch".

Understood.

We added BTrees to Durus, not to save cpu cycles, but for better
memory/storage behavior, which for our applications seems to be
more important than the speed of low level BTree operations.
I assume that a C implementation for specialized
key/value types must be even better for memory/storage behavior
since you can arrange things to be more compact.
Of course the low level operations can be faster too,
and available for direct access from other C extensions,
and everybody likes that.















_______________________________________________
For more information about ZODB, see the ZODB Wiki:
http://www.zope.org/Wikis/ZODB/

ZODB-Dev mailing list  -  ZODB-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zodb-dev

Reply via email to