On 3/31/2012 10:54 PM, Tim Roberts wrote:
John Nagle<na...@animats.com> wrote:
On 3/30/2012 2:32 PM, Irmen de Jong wrote:
Try Oursql instead http://packages.python.org/oursql/
"oursql is a new set of MySQL bindings for python 2.4+, including python 3.x"
Not even close to being compatible with existing code. Every SQL
statement has to be rewritten, with the parameters expressed
differently. It's a good approach, but very incompatible.
Those changes can be automated, given an adequate editor. "Oursql" is a
far better product than the primitive MySQLdb wrapper. It is worth the
trouble.
It's an interesting approach. As it matures, and a few big sites
use it. it will become worth looking at.
The emphasis on server-side buffering seems strange. Are there
benchmarks indicating this is worth doing? Does it keep transactions
locked longer? This bug report
https://answers.launchpad.net/oursql/+question/191256
indicates a performance problem. I'd expect server side buffering
to slow things down. Usually, you want to drain results out of
the server as fast as possible, then close out the command,
releasing server resources and locks.
John Nagle
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
