On 29/09/2022 07.22, Robert Latest via Python-list wrote: ... > This is what I came up with. I'm quite happy with it so far. Question: Am I > being too clever? is it too complicated? Am I overlooking something that will > come back and bite me later? Thanks for any comments!
Thank you for the chuckle: "Yes", you are clever; and "yes", this is likely a bit too clever (IMHO). The impression is that LRU will put something more-concrete, 'in front of' SQLAlchemy - which is more abstract, and which is in-turn 'in front of' the RDBMS (which is concrete...). Is this the code-smell making one's nose suspicious? The criticism is of SQLAlchemy. If the problem can't be solved with that tool, perhaps it is not the right-tool-for-the-job... Bias: With decades of SQL/RDBMS experience, it is easy to say, "drop the tool". +1 @Chris: depending upon how many transactions-between, it seems likely find that the RDBMS will cache sufficiently, as SOP. YMMV, ie there's only one way to find-out! -- Regards, =dn -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
