On Jan 15, 2008, at 8:32 AM, Emmanuel Lecharny wrote:
Hi,
while dealing with some tricky serialization code, I faced some
little problem... We currently can only serialize a straight
ServerEntry without its reference to the registries, but then when
we need to deserialize the ServerEntry, we will have to add those
registries after the entry has been read from disk (or memory).
This is a little bit cumbersome, as it forces the developper to
remember to do so, otherwise, he won't be able to modify the entry.
Another problem I'm facing is that Mitosis currently use Entry to
communicate between two servers. For the same obvious reason, there
is no mean to save the registries in the serialazed form of the
ServerEntry, so I'm just wondering if we should not simply use the
LDIF Entry structure to exchange entries ?
Right now, I will translate ServerEntry to Attributes and back,
until we have a clear vision of what we need to do.
wdyt ? Any other better idea to solve these problems ?
I think this really raises the question as to whether including the
registries in ServerEntry is completely wise....
One strategy to make them serializable would be to define a new class
public class ObjectInputStreamWithRegistries extends ObjectInputStream {
private final Registries registries;
public ObjectInputStreamWithRegistries(InputStream in, Registries reg) {
super(in);
this.registries = reg;
}
public Registries getRegistries() {
return registries;
}
}
and in ServerEntry
private void readObject(java.io.ObjectInputStream in)
throws IOException, ClassNotFoundException {
in.defaultReadObject();
this.registries = ((ObjectInputStreamWithRegistries)
in).getRegistries();
}
Obviously this needs a bit more error checking and requires people to
use a special ObjectInputStream.
thanks
david jencks
--
--
cordialement, regards,
Emmanuel Lécharny
www.iktek.com
directory.apache.org
