On 1/24/03 11:02 AM, "Chris McDonough" <chrism@zope.com> wrote:
CatalogPathAware won't help with speed, but unlike CatalogAware it uses the absolute physical path of an object as the catalog key instead of the relative (URL-based) path of an object as the catalog key. This is most useful in virtual hosting scenarios. You should probably reindex your catalog after switching (and test heavily before putting it in to production) if you do make the switch.
On Fri, 2003-01-24 at 10:59, Chris Muldrow wrote:
If I have a CatalogAware Zclass and I've moved into 2.6, would it be advisable to rebase it as CatalogPathAware, since CatalogAware is deprecated? I'm not sure I really understand the difference in the two, but I am having some speed/performance issues with this Zclass and the Catalog.
-Chris muldrow@mac.com
_______________________________________________ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
What types of actions tend to make indexing/searching faster? I'm wondering if we have too many indexes (8 fieldindexes, 1 dateindex, 1 keyword index and 1 zctextindex) or too much metadata (12 fields). Of course, I'm still trying to hunt down a leak, but we're using 2.6 so Leakfinder won't run on it. Is there a good substitute for it?