-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Martin Aspeli wrote: > On 1 October 2012 15:15, Andreas Jung <[email protected]> wrote: Hi > there, > > data defined through a schema in Dexterity seems to be stored > directly as attribute on the persistent context object. Why is this > the case? Wasn't it consider bad practice in the AT world doing this? > A simple change to one attribute causes the complete persistent > object to be written to disk. Why doesn't Dexterity make use of > annotations or a btree here? > >> Because it's not bad practice. ;-) > >> Most of the time, you read and write the object in its entirety, >> i.e. rendering a view or saving an edit form. In this case, loading >> one object (and taking up one slot in the object cache) is much >> better than each being its own bucket (or something similar with >> BTrees). Good and bad practice is obviously in the eye of the beholder. I could argue against this opinion but anyway....tnx. - -aj -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQGUBAEBAgAGBQJQacjdAAoJEADcfz7u4AZj1NcLvR+4b53ywR/o2Re36Ejo0SvG IzZrVALXR+PlA0TLnA96epmL9zkK6hrsOuF2Kcfz9bMPonx/89sBxJuiEp5B4g+f BPqYAFQBtYYw3DENS/bRTvPm6lBiSnMkmvoT5alibrWNfca1EchK0WfsXdAW305U k2juhbF4jPfHUWLUVDmV/aVK4CjzSZYO/YSVTy07W5IoICi3WLVfbmscSitIg6Bt 9D6e/yWv8oN6Ye4vlqxumSMuw3Bf2hskdEpe562K0aZC+I/jqPQs+rdyBNCwx/wV 4nHXkD+Esk3XKAE0e6XounjFhe6Z4cbK2wSolLwMoC+Wil/aoAaL6SQ0MiG1zX6P fynPYjeOVqbJ43a/5FOC8EzMhX9Ig9bElGjxq7ptibyNXdwe1ItpXgo0MGL71n4K gYxmduWIeoBJTFNG9l45XaOEEpdwD0OKMeiHagkHdrHCrAvatbpPli4LJ7fBKrVC gVm96POkqhGJfiiX6mfEOPktfcZx+hU= =j+JP -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
<<attachment: lists.vcf>>
_______________________________________________ Product-Developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/plone-product-developers
