On Mon, 2008-10-27 at 13:41 +0100, Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> On Oct 27, 2008, at 13:32 , Roché Compaan wrote:
> > On Mon, 2008-10-27 at 13:23 +0100, Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
> >> When it comes to integrating anything in Zope itself I'd choose the
> >> latter.
> > Sure, we're not trying to get this into Zope, we're just sharing our
> > experience and exploring the territory so that one can produce a third
> > party package that really help people with the same use case (which I
> > suspect is quite common one).
> Right, it's perfectly valid to create such a third party package. The
> discussion just highlights a greater issue. Personally, I don't think
> it's good practice to focus on the expediency of working around a
> problem as opposed to tackling the problem directly. The Zope world is
> littered with add-ons that act as band-aids on real or perceived
> shortcomings in Zope itself.
Improving the performance of indexes is really really hard. In this case
I really don't think caching is a band-aid, it is a good solution. Even
with optimised indexes, you will find that you need caching to get
reasonable performance if you have a catalog with close to a million or
more documents indexed. Given a large enough catalog, I would argue that
caching is equally as necessary as having a large cache for a ZEO
But caches expire and results get invalidated, and therefor we should
continue to optimise indexes. With some help we should be able to
contribute at this level too.
Upfront Systems http://www.upfrontsystems.co.za
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -