On 5/23/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
but what I've realized is that do handle the cached, I'd need something
like-
MyObj
MyObj::Manager
MyObj::Cached
MyObj::Cached::Manager
The benefits of having a Manager for a ::Cached class are dubious.
Unless you plan to save() (or remember() or forget()) some of the
objects returned by the Manager, it doesn't really matter whether the
Manager's object_class is ::Cached or not.
Remember, all ::Cached does is change the way load() and save() work,
and add methods to add or remove an individual object to/from the
cache. It doesn't change the way the Manager works at all since the
Manager never load()s or save()s individual objects. (It builds them
using data that it fetches itself from the db.)
not sure if anyone understands what I'm talking about either - basically i
want to define the table structure 1x, and have live + cached instances +
managers of that
You could do that if you wanted, although see above about the
usefulness of Managers for ::Cached classes. Just define the metadata
in one place and make the others inherit from it. (See earlier
reference to the inheritance docs.)
-John
-------------------------------------------------------
All the advantages of Linux Managed Hosting--Without the Cost and Risk!
Fully trained technicians. The highest number of Red Hat certifications in
the hosting industry. Fanatical Support. Click to learn more
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid7521&bid$8729&dat1642
_______________________________________________
Rose-db-object mailing list
Rose-db-object@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rose-db-object
