On Thu, 2009-04-02 at 09:22 -0500, Alan Runyan wrote: > It seems like such an easy goal: autoincremental integers for a > container. Is this such a problem because of the ZODB architecture? > or lack there of? There are two database primitives that everyone > appears to want: > > - autoincrementing integers for containers (tables) > > - indexes (not in application) > > The new generation of databases (couchdb, tokyo cabinet, hypertable, > etc) autoincrementing is usually absent. Though these data containers > usually have index support.
ZODB has autoincrement support for one type: OIDs. The problem of autoincrement is that this needs to be handled outside the scope of transactions. In a distributed fashion this seems rather hard to do in comparison to just buying into conflicts. The indexes are hard too. We have gocept.objectquery which is (still) in a proof-of-concept state, although I'm getting really motivated WRT using it for migrations. Christian -- Christian Theune · c...@gocept.com gocept gmbh & co. kg · forsterstraße 29 · 06112 halle (saale) · germany http://gocept.com · tel +49 345 1229889 7 · fax +49 345 1229889 1 Zope and Plone consulting and development
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ For more information about ZODB, see the ZODB Wiki: http://www.zope.org/Wikis/ZODB/ ZODB-Dev mailing list - ZODB-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zodb-dev
