Hi Perrin, Good call. :)
Rose::DB::Object::Cached would be a likely choice, except we're looking at a multi-server cache - as Jonathan mentioned above, memcached is our intended target. Thanks, Peter Perrin Harkins wrote: > Peter Leonard wrote: >> I understand the complexity involved, and what we're looking for is the >> quick storage & retrieval of the underlying data > > It sounds like you want to cache the data. Did you consider expanding > Rose::DB::Object::Cached to use your data storage of choice instead of > memory? > > - Perrin > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT > Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your > opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash > http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV > _______________________________________________ > Rose-db-object mailing list > Rose-db-object@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rose-db-object -- ---- Peter Leonard [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Rose-db-object mailing list Rose-db-object@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rose-db-object
