> Compared to sqlite, you don't need to know SQL, you can finetuning
> (for example, using ACI instead of ACID, deciding store by store), and
> you can do replication and distributed transactions (useful, for
> example, if your storage is bigger than a single machine capacity,
> like my case). If you combine Berkeley DB with Durus, for example, all
> of this is abstracted and you simply use "regular" python objects.
Titus> I agree. I like bsddb for just this reason and I'd like to
Titus> continue being able to use it! I think that there are many
Titus> reasons why having such a thing in the stdlib is really useful
Titus> and I also think it's worth exploring the ramifications of taking
Titus> it out...
I suggested in another message (perhaps on another thread) that maybe a
dbm.sqlite module would be worth having. It would have a dict-ish API like
the other dict-on-disk modules but use the sqlite module to read (SELECT)
and write (INSERT and UPDATE) key/value pairs from the underlying database.
Skip
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4