-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 13 Apr 2005 09:44 am, you wrote:
On Tue, 2005-04-12 at 19:08, Richard Jones wrote:
Is there a viable non-versioned alternative to the filestorage approach? My sessions database grows ridiculously quickly. I'm also fairly sure it's causing problems when my site gets ~5 requests a second (yes, that low)
You could use temporarystorage on the ZEO server if you don't really need your session data to be persistent across ZEO server restarts. This is what Fernando appeared to do in the end.
Having sessions persist across ZEO restarts is a handy thing. Also, I never figured how to configure a temp storage in a ZEO server. I started looking once, but either ran into a dead end or got distracted (or both ;)
There are no well-maintained nonundoing storages that I know of other than temporarystorage. Once upon a time, BerkeleyStorage minimal used to work, but its gone the way of the dinosaurs apparently.
And I distrust anything related to Berkely DB :)
I think any sessioning setup that uses a ZEO-backed storage will be more conflict-prone than one that doesn't use ZEO, just because the transaction commit time is typically longer. I'm not sure if this is the problem you mention.
Could be.
Probably not hard. You could write a "session data manager" implementation that used a relational database. The interface for those things is in Products/Sessions/SessionInterfaces.py
Yeah, I remember poking around that code way back, and it seemed reasonable. Its interactions with transactions are the bits that scare me. Using a standard RDBMS connection would probably solve that though. Richard -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFCXGFkrGisBEHG6TARAkp7AJ9xavG5iY4wQjGLkdjGmvqxn/mDoACfRXsh 5vLa0EwojCSZlBAi7e1Vuqo= =WTon -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----