Re: [Zope-dev] Re: AdaptableStorage

2003-02-05 Thread Shane Hathaway
Shane Hathaway wrote: That would be pretty cool, since it's easy for scripts to add to the queue, and it gives you plenty of granularity. It wouldn't work under Windows, though, AFAIK. Maybe on Windows we could call back to a network socket that accepts the same kind of data. Oops, I meant

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: AdaptableStorage

2003-02-05 Thread Shane Hathaway
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Shane I have been thinking about this last night. I think you should provide some sort of out of band signalling method. But given that Adaptable Storage sits below ZODB, which sit's below Zope, I feel that the signalling method should be directed at the lowest

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: AdaptableStorage

2003-01-22 Thread Chris Withers
seb bacon wrote: I'd prefer just to have a method somewhere that, as Shane suggested, could be hit by URL, etc. A whole seperate server seems like overkill... But what about, for example, databases which don't have an efficient way to do callbacks to external applications? You may have to do

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: AdaptableStorage

2003-01-22 Thread Shane Hathaway
On Wed, 22 Jan 2003, Chris Withers wrote: I think this is as such is life problem. Provided AdaptableStorage provides some way (exposed url?) for an external process to say that things have changed, I think that's the best form of flexibility we can provide. I think I'll provide such an URL,

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: AdaptableStorage

2003-01-22 Thread seb bacon
Chris Withers wrote: seb bacon wrote: I'd prefer just to have a method somewhere that, as Shane suggested, could be hit by URL, etc. A whole seperate server seems like overkill... Well, if by server you could mean script that gets run by cron every 1 minute and hits a URL in Zope if

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: AdaptableStorage

2003-01-22 Thread THoffman
Hi Shane I have been thinking about this last night. I think you should provide some sort of out of band signalling method. But given that Adaptable Storage sits below ZODB, which sit's below Zope, I feel that the signalling method should be directed at the lowest level. This means that method

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: AdaptableStorage

2003-01-21 Thread seb bacon
How about having a seperate process which just watched the files and notifed Zope when they changed? A definite possibility. It might even just poke an URL to send the notification. Since every storage will have its own unique notification scheme, which may be more or less inefficient

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: AdaptableStorage

2003-01-21 Thread Chris Withers
seb bacon wrote: Since every storage will have its own unique notification scheme, which may be more or less inefficient (worst case scenario, periodic polling of entire storage for recently modified items), it might make sense to have a notification server. It would make it simpler for users

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: AdaptableStorage

2003-01-21 Thread seb bacon
Chris Withers wrote: seb bacon wrote: Since every storage will have its own unique notification scheme, which may be more or less inefficient (worst case scenario, periodic polling of entire storage for recently modified items), it might make sense to have a notification server. It would

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: AdaptableStorage

2003-01-20 Thread Chris Withers
Shane Hathaway wrote: I'm thinking about real-time updates. When the underlying data changes, you'd like Zope to see the change immediately. If indefinite delays are OK, then AdaptableStorage already does enough: it raises a ConflictError if you try to write changes based on old data. I

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: AdaptableStorage

2003-01-20 Thread Shane Hathaway
Chris Withers wrote: Shane Hathaway wrote: I'm thinking about real-time updates. When the underlying data changes, you'd like Zope to see the change immediately. If indefinite delays are OK, then AdaptableStorage already does enough: it raises a ConflictError if you try to write changes

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: AdaptableStorage

2003-01-16 Thread Shane Hathaway
Chris Withers wrote: Shane Hathaway wrote: performance. There needs to be a way for applications that modify the database to tell Zope about the modification, so Zope can reset its caches. But, IIRC, the last time this was discussed on a mailing list you had some cool ideas to sovle the

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: AdaptableStorage

2003-01-16 Thread Shane Hathaway
seb bacon wrote: Shane Hathaway wrote: Chris Withers wrote: Shane Hathaway wrote: performance. There needs to be a way for applications that modify the database to tell Zope about the modification, so Zope can reset its caches. But, IIRC, the last time this was discussed on a mailing

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: AdaptableStorage

2003-01-16 Thread seb bacon
Shane Hathaway wrote: Chris Withers wrote: Shane Hathaway wrote: performance. There needs to be a way for applications that modify the database to tell Zope about the modification, so Zope can reset its caches. But, IIRC, the last time this was discussed on a mailing list you had some

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: AdaptableStorage

2003-01-16 Thread Oliver Bleutgen
Shane Hathaway wrote: On the filesystem, the problem seems much more difficult, since there are no transactions. You'd like the kernel to send Zope a message anytime someone modifies a file in a certain hierarchy, but that would require kernel hacking. FWIW, since I had the same problem

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: AdaptableStorage

2003-01-16 Thread Shane Hathaway
Oliver Bleutgen wrote: Shane Hathaway wrote: On the filesystem, the problem seems much more difficult, since there are no transactions. You'd like the kernel to send Zope a message anytime someone modifies a file in a certain hierarchy, but that would require kernel hacking. FWIW, since I

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: AdaptableStorage

2003-01-16 Thread Oliver Bleutgen
Shane Hathaway wrote: Oliver Bleutgen wrote: Shane Hathaway wrote: On the filesystem, the problem seems much more difficult, since there are no transactions. You'd like the kernel to send Zope a message anytime someone modifies a file in a certain hierarchy, but that would require kernel

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: AdaptableStorage

2003-01-16 Thread Shane Hathaway
Oliver Bleutgen wrote: Shane Hathaway wrote: I've seen it before, but I don't think FAM is able to monitor an entire directory tree. It only monitors individual files. I'd really like to be wrong. :-) I think you are wrong, because the manpage (for IRIX) says otherwise. Additionally, it

[Zope-dev] Re: AdaptableStorage

2003-01-15 Thread Shane Hathaway
seb bacon wrote: Shane, AdaptableStorage is insane and beautiful - congratulations :-) Thanks! I've been working on this for a long time. Two years ago a Digital Creations customer demanded proper object-relational mapping. The customer abandoned us for different reasons, but I feel like

[Zope-dev] Re: AdaptableStorage

2003-01-15 Thread azazel
Paul Winkler scrive: On Wed, Jan 15, 2003 at 05:30:58PM +, seb bacon wrote: Shane, AdaptableStorage is insane and beautiful - congratulations :-) It seems to inspire insanity :) kosh and i got into a discussion on #zope about using AdaptableStorage with reiserfs4, mapping zope properties