Bruce, Bruce Snyder wrote:
> On 8/8/05, Werner Guttmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >>Hmm ... the fact that EHCache uses serialization internally does not >>really bother me. Here's why: a couple of weeks ago, when trying to >>complete a possible patch for CASTOR-1102, I came to realize that >>Coherence requires all objects stored in its cache classes to implement >>java.io.Serializable. Whilst initially I didn't like this idea at all, I >>came to realize quite quickly that it was really easy to refactor Castor >>in such a way that both the OID and the newly introduced CacheEntry >>classes implement Serializable. > > > I was either not aware of this or I forgot about it. > > >>With regards to the casting taking place, I came to realize that we >>don't store the actual object instances in the cache. What is actually >>stored is an array of field values, most of which all time are of >>'primitive' types and thus Serializable by default. > > > What if one of those fields is a complex object that is not serializable? I have been thinking of this myself, and I came to the conclusion this is not going to happen. I think of (C)LOBs, but they are Serializable by default. Everything else (incl. complex relations through FKs) will be broken down to 'simple' identity fields. I hope you are not going to prove me wrong .. ;-). Werner ------------------------------------------------- If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please send an empty message to the following address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -------------------------------------------------
