Re: [Zope-dev] Re: BTreeFolder

2001-04-29 Thread Chris Withers
Shane Hathaway wrote: Phillip J. Eby wrote: Now, what *I*'d like to know is what the bold new idea is, since it sounds like it's something even newer than the forward-chained-buckets-plus-conflict-resolution stuff that's already been released. snip So, all things considered, you

[Zope-dev] Re: BTreeFolder

2001-04-27 Thread Shane Hathaway
Chris Withers wrote: will you be releasing a new version of BTreeFolder that makes use of the new funky BTrees at any stage? We've done some work on it; in fact Jim came up with a bold new idea that makes them inherently faster. Now to find the time. :-) Shane

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: BTreeFolder

2001-04-27 Thread Chris Withers
Shane Hathaway wrote: Chris Withers wrote: will you be releasing a new version of BTreeFolder that makes use of the new funky BTrees at any stage? We've done some work on it; in fact Jim came up with a bold new idea that makes them inherently faster. Now to find the time. :-) Cool.

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: BTreeFolder

2001-04-27 Thread Michael Bernstein
Shane Hathaway wrote: Chris Withers wrote: will you be releasing a new version of BTreeFolder that makes use of the new funky BTrees at any stage? We've done some work on it; in fact Jim came up with a bold new idea that makes them inherently faster. Now to find the time. :-) Does

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: BTreeFolder

2001-04-27 Thread Phillip J. Eby
At 09:19 AM 4/27/01 -0700, Michael Bernstein wrote: Shane Hathaway wrote: Chris Withers wrote: will you be releasing a new version of BTreeFolder that makes use of the new funky BTrees at any stage? We've done some work on it; in fact Jim came up with a bold new idea that makes

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: BTreeFolder

2001-04-27 Thread Shane Hathaway
Phillip J. Eby wrote: Now, what *I*'d like to know is what the bold new idea is, since it sounds like it's something even newer than the forward-chained-buckets-plus-conflict-resolution stuff that's already been released. It's simple, really. BTreeFolders play havoc with acquisition because

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: BTreeFolder

2001-04-27 Thread Hannu Krosing
Shane Hathaway wrote: However, purely random IDs would cause all the buckets to be loaded in memory all the time, so Jim's third idea was to have each client increment sequentially from a random ID and move to a new random ID if conflicts ever occur. Can't one just assign some unique id

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: BTreeFolder

2001-04-27 Thread Shane Hathaway
Hannu Krosing wrote: Shane Hathaway wrote: However, purely random IDs would cause all the buckets to be loaded in memory all the time, so Jim's third idea was to have each client increment sequentially from a random ID and move to a new random ID if conflicts ever occur. Can't