On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 2:07 PM, Leonardo Santagada <[email protected]>wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 3:10 PM, Jim Fulton <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 12:00 PM, Claudiu Saftoiu <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > Hello all, >> > >> > I'm looking to speed up my server and it seems memcached would be a good >> > way to do it - at least for the `Catalog` (I've already put the catalog >> in a >> > separate >> > zodb with a separate zeoserver with persistent client caching enabled >> and it >> > still doesn't run as nice as I like...) >> > >> > I've googled around a bit and found nothing definitive, though... >> what's the >> > best way to combine zodb/zeo + memcached as of now? >> >> My opinion is that a distributed memcached isn't >> a big enough win, but this likely depends on your use cases. >> >> We (ZC) took a different approach. If there is a reasonable way >> to classify your corpus by URL (or other request parameter), >> then check out zc.resumelb. This fit our use cases well. >> > > Maybe I don't understand zodb correctly but if the catalog is small enough > to fit in memory wouldn't it be much faster to just cache the whole catalog > on the clients? Then at least for catalog searches it is all mostly as fast > as running through python objects. Memcache will put an extra > serialize/deserialize step into it (plus network io, plus context > switches). > That would be fine, actually. Is there a way to explicitly tell ZODB/ZEO to load an entire object and keep it in the cache? I also want it to remain in the cache on connection restart, but I think I've already accomplished that with persistent client-side caching.
_______________________________________________ For more information about ZODB, see http://zodb.org/ ZODB-Dev mailing list - [email protected] https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zodb-dev
