concurrent access to dbms (was best way to store dbm records?)
{-- Rot13 - Hateme
ungrzr2 at ubatxbat.pbz
Wed Oct 11 12:37:30 EDT 2000
More information about the Python-list mailing list
Wed Oct 11 12:37:30 EDT 2000
- Previous message (by thread): best way to store dbm records?
- Next message (by thread): realmeadia bindings
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
aahz at panix.com (Aahz Maruch) wrote in <8rvpfh$933$1 at panix3.panix.com>: >In article <8rpeko$4jd$1 at bob.news.rcn.net>, >Michael B. Allen <mballen at NOSPAM_erols.com> wrote: >> >>Shelve works great Tim, thanks. I have implemented this and it works >>very well for my purposes. >> >>I may have a different issue however. The docs on shelve(and I would >>imagine dbm's in general) report that you cannot concurrently read from >>it if it is open by a writer. If I have interpreted the docs correctly >>this is true even if it is only open by a single writer. > >Without going into the details of your specific needs, have you >considered using a full-blown DBMS? Both MySQL and PostGreSQL would >probably suit you (I have used neither, but they're both claimed to be >multi-user (read "concurrent")). http://www.sleepycat.com 's Berkeley DB will let you do all this things.
- Previous message (by thread): best way to store dbm records?
- Next message (by thread): realmeadia bindings
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-list mailing list