Develop Reference

python data structures for storing classes

I am trying to design a system in python where my customers can create an order and it will be stored in an array or similar type of structure that will be able to constantly expand to store more orders as they are placed. What is the best way to do this?

I can think of two ways to do this.
Serialization. Reference
Create two tables, One called Order and other called order_contents. You can join order and Order_contents by order id. Store Order specific data in order table and content specific data in conetnt. All contents can be retrieved with a single SQL query this way OR in python, easily with ORM.

How big would you expect and order to get and how many orders could there be? Also what is stored in an order?
If you use numpy arrays you have the problem that increasing the size of an array is a very expensive process, so doing it many times on large arrays would be problematic. Numpy arrays also are for data that is all the same type, so you would not use this for things that are combinations of strings (name, item), integers (item reference), and floats (cost).
A simple list is likely the easiest and most inclusive choice. You can put whatever you like in a list and increase the size easily since a list is actually just pointers.
A dictionary could be useful if you are expecting to have to search the list often, or have a clear key-item relationship.
It really comes down to your use case. A list is often the choice, but a dictionary could be nice, and numpy arrays are nice if you are doing math with the stored data.

How to create a nested data structure in Python?

Since I recently started a new project, I'm stuck in the "think before you code" phase. I've always done basic coding, but I really think I now need to carefully plan how I should organize the results that are produced by my script.
It's essentially quite simple: I have a bunch of satellite data I'm extracting from Google Earth Engine, including different sensors, different acquisition modes, etc. What I would like to do is to loop through a list of "sensor-acquisition_mode" couples, request the data, do some more processing, and finally save it to a variable or file.
Suppose I have the following example:
sensors = ['landsat','sentinel1']
sentinel_modes = ['ASCENDING','DESCENDING']
sentinel_polarization = ['VV','VH']
In the end, I would like to have some sort of nested data structure that at the highest level has the elements 'landsat' and 'sentinel1'; under 'landsat' I would have a time and values matrix; under 'sentinel1' I would have the different modes and then as well the data matrices.
I've been thinking about lists, dictionaries or classes with attributes, but I really can't make up my mind, also since I don't have that much of experience.
At this stage, a little help in the right direction would be much appreciated!

Lists: Don't use lists for nested and complex data structures. You're just shooting yourself in the foot- code you write will be specialized to the exact format you are using, and any changes or additions will be brutal to implement.
Dictionaries: Aren't bad- they'll nest nicely and you can use a dictionary whose value is a dictionary to hold named info about the keys. This is probably the easiest choice.
Classes: Classes are really really useful for this if you need a lot of behavior to go with them - you want the string of it to be represented a certain way, you want to be able to use primitive operators for some functionality, or you just want to make the code slightly more readable or reusable.
From there, it's all your choice- if you want to go through the extra code (it's good for you) of writing them as classes, do it! Otherwise, dictionaries will get you where you need to go. Notably the only thing a dictionary couldn't do would be if you have two things that should be at the key level in the dictionary with the same name (Dicts don't do repetition).

Efficient persistent storage for lists in Python

I have a (key, value) map where for each key I have a somewhat large list of heterogeneous lists (~max about 250 items). Each list is a mix of strings and numbers that I might want to iterate over. The key is a string. If I wanted to store such a list with thousands of such (key, value) pairs persistently for efficient retrieval what are the best options? If I use sqlite then I would need to create a table for each key and then map the lists to individual records in the database. Are there better and efficient options if the goal is fast retrieval of the list of lists for a particular key?
Here is a short example. Say animals is a map of keys to list of lists. Sample data looks like this:
animals = {
"Lion" : [["Siberian", 203, "Tanzania", 123.56], ["Russian", 321, "Timbktu", 23423.2]],
"Tiger: [["White", 121, "Australia", 1211.1], ["Indian", 111, "India", 1241.5]]
}
So I want to be able to persist this data structure and be able to quickly index by the name of an animal (always unique) and get the list of lists for the particular animal I care about. If the lists within each animal's info is of fixed length and fixed fields, can I exploit that feature somehow to improve efficiency?

As Blender states in the comment, pickle is a reasonable choice. Make sure not to use the original version, though, and instead use the C-based cPickle. Alternatively, consider dill.

I would suggest one of the fast JSON libraries. There are several speed comparisons online that suggest that JSON can be as fast or rather faster than pickle. Check this one for example:
http://lvsl.github.io/2011/12/28/python-serialization-benchmark.html
and
https://blog.hartleybrody.com/python-serialize/
There are several JSON serialization alternatives, and again, there are some comparisons online, e.g.
https://medium.com/#jyotiska/json-vs-simplejson-vs-ujson-a115a63a9e26
I would suggest looking into ujson, which seems to be really fast and has one big advantage over e.g. pickle, it's very easy to inspect the data as they are saved in a human readable format. On the other hand pickle will be a bit easier to use with custom types, although you can still define custom encoders for custom types for JSON. Overall, choose JSON if you care more about human readability, and pickle if what really matters is having a few lines of code less for custom types.

Depending on your needs, you may want to consider REDIS which is an excellent key:value database solution. This tutorial provides a relatively quick introduction.

Do python references use memory?

I am building a flexible, lightweight, in-memory database in Python, and discovered a performance problem with the way I was looking up values and using indexes. In an effort to improve this I've tried a few options, trying to balance speed with memory usage. My current implementation uses a dict of dicts to store data by record (object reference) and field (also an object reference). So for example, if I have three records with three fields, where some of the data is missing (i.e. NULL values)::
{<Record1>: {<Field1>: 4, <Field2>: 'value', <Field3>: <Other Record>},
{<Record2>: {<Field1>: 4, <Field2>: 'value'},
{<Record3>: {<Field1>: 5}}
I considered a numpy array, but I would still need two dictionaries to map object instances to array indexes, so I can't see that it will perform be any better.
Indexes are implemented using a pair of bisected lists, essentially acting as a map from value to record instance. For example, and index on the above Field1>:
[[4, 4, 5], [<Record1>, <Record2>, <Record3>]]
I was previously using a simple dict of bins, but this didn't allow range lookups (e.g. all values > 5) (see Python hash table for fuzzy matching).
My question is this. I am concerned that I have several object references, and multiple copies of the same values in the indexes. Do all these duplicate references actually use more memory, or are references cheap in python? My alternative is to try to associate a numerical key to each object, which might improve things at least up to 256, but I don't know enough about how python handles references to know if this would really be any better.
Does anyone have any suggestions of a better way to manage this?
Reimplementing the critical parts in C is an option I want to keep as a last resort.
For anyone interested, my code is here.
Edit 1:
The question, simple put, is which of the following is more efficient in terms of memory usage, where a is an object instance and i is an integer:
[a] * 1000
Or
[i] * 1000, {a: i}
Edit 2:
Because of the large number of comments suggesting I use an existing system, here are my requirements. If anyone can suggest a system which fulfills all of these, that would be great, but so far I have not found anything which does. Otherwise, my original question still relates to memory usage of references in python.:
Must be light-weight and in-memory. Definitely not a client/server model.
Need to be able to easily alter tables, change fields, change rules, etc, on the fly.
Need to easily apply very complex validation rules. SQL doesn't meet this requirement. Although it is sometimes possible to build up very complicated statements, it is far from easy.
Need to support joins and associations between tables. Many NoSQL databases don't support joins at all, or at most only simple joins.
Need to support a method of loading and storing data to any file format. I am currently implementing this by providing a framework which makes it easy to add new formats as needed.
It does not need persistence (beyond storing data as in the previous point), and does not need to handle massive amounts of data, i.e. not more than a couple of million records. Typically, I am dealing with a few thousand.

Each reference is in effect a pointer, each pointer requires a small amount of memory.
You can use memory profiler to view memory use on a line by line basis. In this way you can see what happens when you make a reference.

Python does not specify a particular implementation for dynamic memory management, but from the semantics of the language one can assume that a reference uses memory similar to a C pointer.

FWIW, I ran some tests on a 100x100 structure, testing a sparsely populated dictionary structure, a fully populated dictionary structure, a list, and a numpy array. The latter two had a dictionary mapping object references to indexes. I timed getting every item in the structure by index (returning a sentinel for missing data in the sparse dict), and also reported the total size. My results were somewhat surprising:
Structure Time Size
============= ======== =====
full dict 0.0236s 6284
list 0.0426s 13028
sparse dict 0.1079s 1676
array 0.2262s 12608
So the fastest and second smallest was a full dict, presumable because there was no need to run a key in dict check on it.

Python interval based sparse container

I am trying to create an interface between structured data and NLTK. NLP libraries generally work with bags of words, hence I need to turn my structured data into bags of words.
I need to associate the offset of a word with it's meta-data.Therefore my best bet is to have some sort of container that holds ranges as keys (allowing nested ranges) and can retrieve all the meta-data (multiple if the word offset is part of a nested range).
What code can I pickup that would do this efficiently (--i.e., sparse represention of the data ) ? Efficient because my global corpus will have at least a few hundred megabytes.
Note :
I am serialising structured forum posts. which will include posts with sections of quotes with them. I want to know which topic a word belonged to, and weather it's a quote or user-text. There will probably be additional metadata as my work progresses. Note that a word belonging to a quote is what I meant by nested meta-data, so the word is part of a quote, that belongs to a post made by a user.
I know that one can tag words in NLTK I haven't looked into it, if its possible to do what I want that way please comment. But I am still looking for the original approach.
There is probably something in numpy that can solve my problem, looking at that now
edit
The input data is far too complex to rip out and post. I have found what I was looking for tho http://packages.python.org/PyICL/. I needed to talk about intervals and not ranges :D I have used boost extensively, however making that a dependency makes me a bit uneasy (Sadly, I am having compiler errors with PyICL :( ).
The question now is: anyone know an interval container library or data structure that can be used to index nested intervals in a sparse fashion. Or put differently provides similar semantics to boost.icl

If you don't want to use PyICL or boost.icl Instead of relying on a specialized library you could just use sqlite3 to do the job ? If you use an in0memory version it will still be a few orders of magnitudes slower than boost.icl (from experience coding other data structures vs sqlite3) but should be more effective than using a c++ std::vector style approach on top of python containers.
You can use two integers and have date_type_low < offset < date_type_high predicate in your where clause. And depending on your table structure this will return nested/overlapping ranges.