Hi Have you tried this?
For starters you can't assign values to numbers. ie no matter what you do you can't assign 2009 = 'abc' You would need to use some other identifier as you mentioned and then specify something like year_2009 = db.IntegerProperty(name=2009) or something similiar. I also see a problem with this strategy with regard to index definitions. Whilst running the SDK the indexes will get created as you define data however once you are running in real google environment you will need to make sure you have already defined all possible indexes that you plan to use before you create any new data (or reindex everything), which means indexes for all years you plan to hold data for and search, and months, and combinations of the two. I am not sure this is a particularly good approach, but then I am not sure I get what you are actually doing. Have you compared the performance of lookups between the two strategies, also remembering if you are actually interested in year/ month then you are actually using composite indexes, I wonder if you will ever use the month only index (apart from comparing months with months for all years in no particular order) Rgds T On Nov 3, 12:22 am, Eli <[email protected]> wrote: > Here's something I've been wondering about Expando. > > Say you define an Expando model like so: > > class meStats(db.Expando): > meNumber = db.IntegerProperty(required=True) > > And, then you begin populating it like so: > > meEntity1 = meStats(meNumber = 200, > June = 14, > 2009 = 6) > > meEntity.put() > > meEntity2 = meStats(meNumber = 381, > July = 21, > 2009 = 7) > > meEntity2.put() > > ..and so on. > > The "July" column only has indexes for entities that have "July" > defined.. correct? So, in effect, I am creating a partitioned index > for a table that can grow indefinitely.. and each time I get to a new > year/month combo, I am inserting into new indexes..? (instead of > inserting into an ever increasing, monolithic "Month" column index..) > > Mainly, I'm packing the pertinent information into the column names > and column values (instead of making the column name just some dummy > value like "Month").. this allows me to implicitly create the > partitioned table/index (I think of it as a partitioned index since it > is, schematically [as far as I'm concerned], one table.) > > You could give the columns better names.. maybe "June_Day" and maybe > "2009_Month" if you wanted... > > Does this make sense? Have I misunderstood how Expando handles > indexes? > > Another way to word this question would be: > > Is there a difference between the indexes created for the June and > July entries in the above Expando model and the below Model models: > > class meJune09Stats(db.Model): > meNumber = db.IntegerProperty(required=True) > June = db.IntegerProperty(required=True) > 2009 = db.IntegerProperty(required=True) > > class meJuly09Stats(db.Model): > meNumber = db.IntegerProperty(required=True) > July = db.IntegerProperty(required=True) > 2009 = db.IntegerProperty(required=True) > > Thanks for any information. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
