Am Freitag, den 22.07.2011, 12:49 +0200 schrieb Albert Cervera i Areny:
> A Divendres, 22 de juliol de 2011 11:27:19, Cédric Krier va escriure:
> 
> > On 22/07/11 10:45 +0200, Albert Cervera i Areny wrote:
> 
> > > A Dimarts, 19 de juliol de 2011 10:56:14, Cédric Krier va
> escriure:
> 
> > > > On 19/07/11 09:56 +0200, Borja LS wrote:
> 
> > > > > El 17/07/11 11:51, Cédric Krier escribió:
> 
> > > > > >proposal to drop NetRPC for jsonrpc
> 
> > > > > 
> 
> > > > > What about using Pyro instead of NetRPC?
> 
> > > > > (http://packages.python.org/Pyro/)
> 
> > > > 
> 
> > > > I don't know Pyro but it seems to be design to work with Pyro
> object on
> 
> > > > the server side. This means that it requires to modify a lot of
> the
> 
> > > > server to match the Pyro concept or to use just one proxy object
> but I
> 
> > > > think we will lost a lot from the coolness of Pyro.
> 
> > > > 
> 
> > > > > NaN used it for Koo (KDE based OpenObject Client) with great
> success
> 
> > > > > (is much faster than NetRPC over high latency networks).
> 
> > > > 
> 
> > > > I think this is due to a bug in NetRPC which we fixed in Tryton
> a while
> 
> > > > ago. And perhaps Koo uses some async calls which could hide the
> 
> > > > latency?
> 
> > > 
> 
> > > We use async calls in Koo but not using Pyro's mechanism.
> 
> > 
> 
> > We had a talk in B2CK about async calls in the client but we find
> that it
> 
> > was not right because if we do so we must any way freeze the GUI to
> 
> > prevent any change from the user.
> 
> > Let's look at an example:
> 
> > 
> 
> > The user modify a field that has an on_change call. The client
> starts
> 
> > the on_change call and directly gives back the hand to the user. The
> user
> 
> > starts editing the next field. During the edition, the callback of
> the
> 
> > on_change is triggered and it must change the value of the field the
> user
> 
> > is currently edited. What should we do?
> 
> > 
> 
> > For me, it is better to work on having request calls very fast to
> prevent
> 
> > the user to wait but async calls will just hide the problem.
> 
> > 
> 
> > And other thing that will be good to have thread-safe rpc calls. For
> now
> 
> > there is a lock for each call which means that only one rpc call
> running
> 
> > at a time. There is already some background rpc calls like the one
> to
> 
> > fetch the number of attachments of the selected record but I think
> we
> 
> > could have more if we could have multi-rpc call at a time. This
> should be
> 
> > possible because the JSON-RPC syntax allow to pass an id to the
> request.
> 
> 
> I agree. In Koo async calls are rarely used. They're used for the
> number of pending requests and in wizards (in Qt only the main
> application thread can update the GUI so we must do RPC calls async).
> 
> 
> What it would be very good is if we only blocked the current tab, so
> one could have a pending request per tab instead of per-application.
> Unfortunately that probably requires too many changes but it would be
> a great improvement.

+1 would be a really great improvement
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> Albert Cervera i Areny
> 
> http://www.NaN-tic.com
> 
> OpenERP Partners
> 
> Tel: +34 93 553 18 03
> 
> 
> http://twitter.com/albertnan 
> 
> http://www.nan-tic.com/blog
> 
> -- 
> [email protected] mailing list

-- 
Korbinian Preisler
____________________________________
virtual things
Preisler & Spallek GbR
Munich - Aix-la-Chapelle

Windeckstr. 77
81375 Munich - Germany
Tel: +49 (89) 710 481 55
Fax: +49 (89) 710 481 56

[email protected]
http://www.virtual-things.biz

-- 
[email protected] mailing list

Reply via email to