Hi all! This mail is about enhancement #10977 (Automatic dirty checking for persistent objects).
Further investigation and discussions with Frederick turned out that it is not possible to implement this feature in a sensible way, because of several reasons: a) Referential integrity A basic idea behind this feature is to hide specialities like the order in which operations are performed from the user. For database structures that use foreign-keys and therefore require referential integrity, the order of operations (e.g. delete) is highly important. There is no possibility for us to determine the correct order, since we do not know what the database structure looks like and even if we knew, we would need tricky mechanisms to figure out the correct order which would raise the overhead too much to be still sensible. b) Relation support Since PersistentObject allows to handle relations between objects, this feature would need to reflect this, too. When it comes to relations, different relation types need different handling (e.g. with a 1:n relation the 1-object needs to be in the database before the n-object may be added and the n-object must be saved afterwards again, for n:m relations both objects need to exist in the database before). To handle this gracefully, we would need to perform complex checks during the save-operation of this feature which would produce more overhead than it gains advantage. Regards, Toby -- Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Med vennlig hilsen / With kind regards Tobias Schlitt (GPG: 0xC462BC14) eZ Components Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] | eZ Systems AS | ez.no -- Components mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ez.no/mailman/listinfo/components
