Re: Patch for simple walk caching

On Mon, 6 Dec 2004, Ted Leung wrote:
>
> I've attached a small patch to tools.py which caches the results of 
> calls to tools.Walk.  On my blog, I am using pycategories, pyarchives, 
> and pycalendar, each of which do a tools.Walk of the entire datadir. 
> This was taking up a bunch of time, so I started looking for ways to 
> reduce this. At the moment the patch caches according to the value of 
> the root passed to Walk, and assumes fixed values for the optional 
> parameters.  This is good enough to reduce the number of calls related 
> to tools.Walk dramatically.
>
> I could just commit the patch, but I wanted to get some feedback on 
> whether folks thought this was a good thing.

This is at least the third or fourth patch I've seen that attempts to 
solve the index caching problem by creating a module-level cache for 
tools.Walk results.  To date, the reason I've been giving that we should 
reject these types of patches is that we didn't want anything stored 
globally because if you run PyBlosxom in some CGI execution environments 
(and I'm really vague on this--it was more of a Wari thing), then there 
is the possibility that there are multiple threads of execution involved.

So, my thinking is that if this fixes peoples' stuff, then they should go 
ahead and apply the patch locally, but we shouldn't apply this patch to 
the codebase because it doesn't fit our architectural requirements.

/will


-------------------------------------------------------
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. 
http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/