On May 31, 2006, at 9:55 AM, Sidnei da Silva wrote:
On Wed, May 31, 2006 at 09:49:49AM -0400, Chris McDonough wrote:
| I've done this (at least with FileStorage) and it's
| sllllllooooooooowwww. Might be OK for low-traffic sites, but better
| to implement a custom session data container that stores stuff in
| SQL. I have the beginnings of one of these if you want to see it.
Slow for using sessions? Why didn't you use tempstorage then?
I think I thought it wouldn't have mattered. The difference between
using sessions against a local filestorage and one on a ZEO server
was something like 20X.
Or you
are just asserting that FileStorage over ZEO is noticeably slower than
directly?
Yes, at least for writes. As I assume tempstorage would be too. And
since sessions are all about writes, it's very noticeable.
- C
_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
