From: Robert Klemme <shortcutter@...>
Date: 2008-05-10T17:30:09+09:00
Subject: Re: Persistent Hash

On 09.05.2008 23:22, Kyle Schmitt wrote:

> 2 PStore seems a little clunky, but rather effective: How is it with
> medium sized data sets (hashes of a few thousand elements)?  How is
> over the longer term, data resiliency wise?

Might be an option, depending on how long your transactions are.  If 
they are short you might get away with doing a file lock on the store to 
ensure concurrency safety.  If transactions are longer or load is higher 
you better use a relational database.

> 3 Marshalling and un-marshalling I know will work, but at the same
> time it seems... well a bit prosaic.

Marshal isn't really an option as it requires too much work around it to 
make it concurrency safe IMHO.  PStore is basically Marshal with 
transactional behavior added.

You do not mention DBI, i.e. writing your SQL yourself.  If your 
application has to cope with significant concurrency (i.e. high number 
of concurrent requests and / or long transactions) a RDBMS will give you 
the best results IMHO because it contains mechanisms that deal with 
this.  Note that you can for example use the free version of Oracle or 
Postgres, MySQL etc.

Kind regards

	robert