Message73012
I like Skip's version better, because it's closer to the dbm
"specification" instead of trying to mimic bsddb (first, last, etc.).
I'd like to keep such things out.
I've made a few changes to the sandbox project which I will check in
later today. The most important change is support for a "fast mode",
which doesn't commit changes until you call the synch() method. synch()
is also called on close().
Perhaps we should do automatic commits every n (like 1000) changes, too?
What's all this ORDER BY in both your implementations about? The dbm
"spec" says nothing about keys being ordered AFAIC. Can we get rid of these? |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2008-09-11 10:38:14 | ghaering | set | recipients:
+ ghaering, skip.montanaro, rhettinger, gregory.p.smith, jcea, josiahcarlson, pitrou, gregburd |
2008-09-11 10:38:14 | ghaering | set | messageid: <1221129494.72.0.298685110284.issue3783@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2008-09-11 10:37:45 | ghaering | link | issue3783 messages |
2008-09-11 10:37:45 | ghaering | create | |
|