cleaning up venue persistence

[Ivan R. Judson]

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
>