Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

In memory data structure can be sizeable if the on-disk cache is large #15

Open
rpetrich opened this issue Aug 9, 2011 · 4 comments
Open

Comments

@rpetrich
Copy link

rpetrich commented Aug 9, 2011

I've switched to using SQLite in my fork. There is no migration code, but it could be useful as a starting point:
https://github.com/rpetrich/SDURLCache/tree/sqlite

@rs
Copy link
Owner

rs commented Aug 10, 2011

Maybe the index storage logic could be split into another class so we could make them plugable and easier to maintain?

@rpetrich
Copy link
Author

I am in favor of that.

@rs
Copy link
Owner

rs commented Aug 12, 2011

And what about another storage backend more memory efficient and faster than SQLite like for instance Kyoto Cabinet or LevelDB?

@rpetrich
Copy link
Author

I've found SQLite to be sufficiently memory efficient with the default settings and sufficiently speedy with SQLITE_OPEN_NOMUTEX and PRAGMA synchronous = 1;

Would be interested to compare with other data stores though. If you make it pluggable, I would be willing to commit and possibly maintain the SQLite backend.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants