> Chris McDonough wrote:
> >
> > This purpose aligns well with those of the ArmoredCatalog proposal as
well..
> > see http://dev.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Proposals/ArmoredCatalog .
> >
> > > But even using such a "lazy catalog awareness", you might get into
> > > trouble. Using the ZCatalog's "find
Chris McDonough wrote:
>
> > A solution might be a kind of "lazy catalog awareness": Instead of
> > mangling a new object through one or more catalogs when it is created,
> > this object could be added to a list of objects to be cataloged later.
> > This way, the transaction to insert a new objec
Chris McDonough wrote:
>
> This purpose aligns well with those of the ArmoredCatalog proposal as well..
> see http://dev.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Proposals/ArmoredCatalog .
>
> > But even using such a "lazy catalog awareness", you might get into
> > trouble. Using the ZCatalog's "find objects" fun
> A solution might be a kind of "lazy catalog awareness": Instead of
> mangling a new object through one or more catalogs when it is created,
> this object could be added to a list of objects to be cataloged later.
> This way, the transaction to insert a new object would become much
> "cheaper". I
Giovanni Maruzzelli wrote:
>
> Hello Zopistas,
>
> we are developing a Zope 2.3.3 (py 1.5.2) application that will add, index
> and reindex some tens of thousands
> objects (Zclass that are DTMLDocument on steroids) on some twenty properties
> each day, while
> the absolute number of objects cat
Hello Zopistas,
we are developing a Zope 2.3.3 (py 1.5.2) application that will add, index
and reindex some tens of thousands
objects (Zclass that are DTMLDocument on steroids) on some twenty properties
each day, while
the absolute number of objects cataloged keeps growing (think at content
manag
