cleaning up venue persistence
Ivan R. Judson
judson at mcs.anl.gov
Thu Feb 20 11:29:48 CST 2003
We might do something different in beta, since the semantics are only
slightly icky. I think they'd be pretty icky with anything we use as long as
we have service objects *in* the venue, today's move away from that willl
significantly clean up the semantics I believe.
--Ivan
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ag-dev at mcs.anl.gov
> [mailto:owner-ag-dev at mcs.anl.gov] On Behalf Of Robert Olson
> Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2003 11:20 AM
> To: ag-dev at mcs.anl.gov
> Subject: cleaning up venue persistence
>
>
> I think that it might clean up the persistence semantics of
> the venue if
> the persistent state were separated into a separate object which then
> stored in the persistent data store; the awakening of a venue
> then involves
> creation of the dynamic venue object, passing it the
> persistent object
> obtained from the data store.
>
>
> On the topic of persistence and venue replication, ZODB
> supports the notion
> of multiple applications using a replicated data store, with
> coherence done
> at the object instance access level... no checkpointing required.
>
> --bob
>
More information about the ag-dev
mailing list