On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 7:44 AM, Malthe Borch <mbo...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 11 December 2011 13:22, Jim Fulton <j...@zope.com> wrote: ... > If it's in the disk cache, to my understanding, it might as well be in > the ZEO client's pickle cache.
You mean the ZODB object cache? Compressed pickles in the zeo client cache take up a lot less memory than live objects in the object cache. Even for data not in the client disk cache, it's likely to me much faster to load the data locally. > My (possibly very, very bad) advice was based on the fact that there's > an obvious, huge win in having a ZEO client cache if it's particularly > expensive to request the object from the ZEO server. But the fastest you can load data is probably slow enough to make a client cache a win. The only time I know of when a client cache isn't a win is when the working set fits in the object cache. > I don't think that less than a microsecond is expensive I assume you meant "millisecond". A millisecond is an eternity by modern standards. > and chances > are that the object is in the disk cache on the ZEO server and not in > the disk cache on the ZEO client. That depends on your application of course, but we aim for ZEO cache hit rates around 90%. Our hit rates are typically 60% or better, in which case, it's more likely to find data in the client cache. Jim -- Jim Fulton http://www.linkedin.com/in/jimfulton _______________________________________________ For more information about ZODB, see http://zodb.org/ ZODB-Dev mailing list - ZODB-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zodb-dev
