Im looking into Implementing a new PageStore but I haven't quite got my head round everything yet. My original change was much more simple, but was too simplistic for the general use case.
As for bundling everything up, it doesn't necessarily need integrating into wicket. The classes could just be bundled into the wicket-terracotta integration module and then use the method visitor thing to force the use of the new session store (like the current one forces the use of httpsessionstore), however there is no real reason why it couldn't be integrated into main wicket code and would probably be more maintainable if it was. Richard Ari Zilka wrote: > > Ok, > > a more productive response. Shall Richard and I bundle up Matej's > proposed updates to Richard's patch and contribute it back? How do I > go about contributing to Wicket? > > Thanks, > > --Ari > > On Jun 30, 2008, at 3:05 AM, richardwilko wrote: > >> >> >> >> Matej Knopp-2 wrote: >>> >>> What might be worth thinking of would be a terracotta based page >>> store >>> (extending AbstractPageStore - class that implements the >>> (de)serialization magic). But even so it would still be necessary to >>> cluster http session. >>> >> >> Thats what kind of what I was thinking, and if we store this >> TerracottaPageStore in the httpsession, rather than on disk a la >> DiskPageStore, then we can just use terracotta to distribute the >> httpsession >> as normal and everything *should* work >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://www.nabble.com/Terracotta-integration-tp18168616p18192381.html >> Sent from the Wicket - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> > > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Terracotta-integration-tp18168616p18197957.html Sent from the Wicket - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
