On Sun, Jun 22, 2003 at 02:49:40PM -0400, Derek Atkins was heard to remark:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Linas Vepstas) writes:
>
> > OK, what I was thinking of was more along the lines of having something like:
> >
> > static LoadObjectDef setters[] = {
> > { ACCOUNT_NAME_, LOAD_STRING, (Setter)xaccAccountSetName },
> > { ACCOUNT_DESCRIPTION_, LOAD_STRING, (Setter)xaccAccountSetDescription },
> > { ACCOUNT_NOTES_, LOAD_STRING, (Setter)xaccAccountSetNotes },
> > };
>
> Ahh, I see what you mean here. I don't think I want the "load-string"
> per se, but adding a "setter" to the object definition would be a
> reasonable first step.
OK, Great. Yes, I glossed the details (like 'whats the sql table name',
and etc.) but I'm pretty sure that this is what I really want to have
at the lowest levels.
> > I'm not sure I understand. (I'm not sure I want to). Aren't you just
> > pushing the problem to a different place? If one client deleted a
> > split, another client that's still holding the old split needs to be
> > able to figure out that it's copy is old, and, at some point, trash
> > it as well. You shouldn't have to move megabytes of data across a
> > wire just to delete one split.
>
> No, I'm not pushing the problem to a different place. I'm trying to
> make the problem easier to handle. If we have a gnucashd sitting
> between the client and the database then we can abstract the event
> handling and get a real-time notification of deletions. The client
> can get the <GNC_EVENT_DESTROY, Split: GUID> event in real-time and
> know that someone else destroyed the object.
Well, but that's kind of how the pg backend works currently. In most
cases the SQL 'NOTIFY gncSplit;' messages gets turned into a
GNC_EVENT_DESTORY. And there's specialcase code for dealing with
two GUI's editing the same split at the same time. So the events
are already there, and I think you still need to have the specialcase
code.
For me, comp sci often seems to be like a hall of transparent walls and
mirrors. Problems move around but never go away.
I should be careful, I suppose. By having a gnucashd, the problem does
mutate, maybe into something easier; I can't tell. I'm not sure I want
to think about it unless you are serious in pursuing that.
--lnas
--
pub 1024D/01045933 2001-02-01 Linas Vepstas (Labas!) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PGP Key fingerprint = 8305 2521 6000 0B5E 8984 3F54 64A9 9A82 0104 5933
_______________________________________________
gnucash-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.gnucash.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
