Andrea Aime ha scritto: > Can we hit a compromise of any kind so that something can be done > on 2.5.x? My enthusiasm on this directory datastore remake has > suddenly dropped below zero, as I've seen this movie already...
Hum... datastore dispose wise I was probably thinking too much. If we have a weak reference based cache and we assume that the client code has to let go of the FeatureSources before we can consider the datastore disposable, then we're probably already good, as all FeatureSource have strong back reference to the DataStore -> the weak reference should not die until there is a strong one to the same object around, isn't it? If you make the parallel, it would work exactly like ResourcePool in GeoServer, the problem is the same, cache the datastores since it's expensive to keep on create them, but not keep around too many of them either. If so, for 2.5.x we can avoid the need to alter the FeatureSource API. Same goes for the FileFeatureSpi interface, the first re-implementation on 2.5.x can assume the two working conventions of 2.5.x file based data stores, File + namespace or URL + namespace, and on trunk we can roll a new interface (and in the meantime, we can deprecate the file related interfaces in 2.5.x). What do you think? Cheers Andrea -- Andrea Aime OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org Expert service straight from the developers. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ SF.Net email is Sponsored by MIX09, March 18-20, 2009 in Las Vegas, Nevada. The future of the web can't happen without you. Join us at MIX09 to help pave the way to the Next Web now. Learn more and register at http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;208669438;13503038;i?http://2009.visitmix.com/ _______________________________________________ Geotools-devel mailing list Geotools-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
