Fred Drake wrote:
On 4/6/07, Philipp von Weitershausen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
How is there a ZCML pain? Simply register the adapter for all
IAnnotatable objects. Typically your content objects are annotatable
anyway because you want DublinCore stuff etc.
This sounds like this will result i
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Thursday 05 April 2007 15:28, Jürgen Kartnaller wrote:
Please do not use an annotation!
This is a performance issue. Your data is very small so do not create a
new object in the database store it directly as a property on the
instance. Every object lookup is expensive,
On 4/6/07, Philipp von Weitershausen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
How is there a ZCML pain? Simply register the adapter for all
IAnnotatable objects. Typically your content objects are annotatable
anyway because you want DublinCore stuff etc.
This sounds like this will result in huge numbers of U
Derek Richardson wrote:
Look at zope.intid; it should be IObjectCreatedEvent or
IObjectAddedEvent.
It's zope.app.intid, btw.
I have started coding a uuid package for Zope. zope.intid uses
IObjectAddedEvent; I plan to as well.
Yes.
However, the uuid differs from the intid in that I want to
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Wednesday 04 April 2007 13:06, Derek Richardson wrote:
I am hoping that Zope 3 assigns an RFC 4122 UUID to each content item.
If not, I am hoping there is a third-party product to do this.
No there is neither. We have an intid utility that guarantees System-wide
uniq
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Thursday 05 April 2007 15:28, Jürgen Kartnaller wrote:
Please do not use an annotation!
This is a performance issue. Your data is very small so do not create a
new object in the database store it directly as a property on the
instance. Every object lookup is expensive,
On Thursday 05 April 2007 15:28, Jürgen Kartnaller wrote:
> Please do not use an annotation!
>
> This is a performance issue. Your data is very small so do not create a
> new object in the database store it directly as a property on the
> instance. Every object lookup is expensive, especially if yo
Derek Richardson wrote:
Martin Aspeli wrote:
Derek Richardson-2 wrote:
Martin Aspeli wrote:
Stephan Richter-2 wrote:
On Wednesday 04 April 2007 13:06, Derek Richardson wrote:
I am hoping that Zope 3 assigns an RFC 4122 UUID to each content
item.
If not, I am hoping there is a third-par
Martin Aspeli wrote:
Derek Richardson-2 wrote:
Martin Aspeli wrote:
Stephan Richter-2 wrote:
On Wednesday 04 April 2007 13:06, Derek Richardson wrote:
I am hoping that Zope 3 assigns an RFC 4122 UUID to each content item.
If not, I am hoping there is a third-party product to do this.
No t
Fred Drake wrote:
On 4/5/07, David Pratt
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The UUID generator that I have been looking at is with the Chandler
project (currently under Apache license) that could be easily wrapped:
Python 2.5 comes with a "uuid" module that works just fine with Python
2.4; that comes
On 4/5/07, David Pratt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The UUID generator that I have been looking at is with the Chandler
project (currently under Apache license) that could be easily wrapped:
Python 2.5 comes with a "uuid" module that works just fine with Python
2.4; that comes in handy as well, a
I also like the idea of UUIDs the way they are meant to be - which
should be independent of the instance. I can imagine a further
possibility to synchronize objects from independent zodb sources if this
existed.
The UUID generator that I have been looking at is with the Chandler
project (cur
On Wed, Apr 04, 2007 at 03:12:26PM -0400, Stephan Richter wrote:
> On Wednesday 04 April 2007 14:34, Derek Richardson wrote:
> > I believe that that will not guarantee a *universally* unique id, but
> > only an id unique within that ZODB. Am I wrong?
>
> Well, intid guarantees to be unique for thi
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Wednesday 04 April 2007 14:34, Derek Richardson wrote:
I believe that that will not guarantee a *universally* unique id, but
only an id unique within that ZODB. Am I wrong?
Well, intid guarantees to be unique for this Zope instance, even accross
multiple databases co
On Wednesday 04 April 2007 14:34, Derek Richardson wrote:
> I believe that that will not guarantee a *universally* unique id, but
> only an id unique within that ZODB. Am I wrong?
Well, intid guarantees to be unique for this Zope instance, even accross
multiple databases conencted to this Zope in
Derek Richardson wrote:
I believe that that will not guarantee a *universally* unique id, but
only an id unique within that ZODB. Am I wrong?
The RFC prescribes a specific algorithm for generating universally
unique IDs.
Of course, they are only "universally unique" in a probabilistic way.
I believe that that will not guarantee a *universally* unique id, but
only an id unique within that ZODB. Am I wrong?
The RFC prescribes a specific algorithm for generating universally
unique IDs.
Derek
Benji York wrote:
Derek Richardson wrote:
I am hoping that Zope 3 assigns an RFC 4122 UU
Derek Richardson and I were just discussing this matter on freenode #vice
... I have no idea at this point if the suggested event model is better,
but it seems like an implementation that safely handles the missing
annotation on request, would be simpler and more efficient.
In other words, r
Martin Aspeli wrote:
Stephan Richter-2 wrote:
On Wednesday 04 April 2007 13:06, Derek Richardson wrote:
I am hoping that Zope 3 assigns an RFC 4122 UUID to each content item.
If not, I am hoping there is a third-party product to do this.
No there is neither. We have an intid utility that guar
19 matches
Mail list logo
