Just to chime in,  my experience with trying to add an audit layer to my OM
objects highlighted the same problem with calls like book.getAuthor().  When
I demoed Turbine to my local JUG, they absolutly loved the power of
book.getAuthor().getLastName(), and I wouldn't want to lose that ease of
use!  But it makes it much harder to insert some sort of logic that does
something with the call to getAuthor().

I ended up adding Book extends AuditBook extends BaseBook extends
BaseObject.  And in AuditBook is the method getAuthor() that does a
super.getAuthor() and then does my auditing logic on the returned Author
object.

It seems to me that being able to relatively insert multiple layers in
Torque might be useful.  Set up , so that each layer doesn't directly depend
on the next.  So if I wanted the caching layer as well, I might have a class
structure like this:  Book extends AuditBook extends CacheBook (or
CacheObject) extends BaseBook extends BaseObject.

I can not wait to see the caching code, I think it will help my applications
performance immensely! 

Eric

-----Original Message-----
From: Jason van Zyl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:32 AM
To: Turbine Users List
Subject: Re: [Torque] Caching [WAS Re: [Torque] Failed testcase]


On 12/18/01 6:50 AM, "Kelvin Tan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>>> Is Aaron's package Torque-specific or a generic cache package?
>> 
>> General tool.
> 
> Hmmm...
> 
> Do you anticipate any problems with implementing it in Torque then, based
on
> the concern raised below?

I don't know yet. Torque isn't released and there may certainly be some
problems but we'll come to that bridge when we get there.
 
> 
>>> However, due to the way Torque's business objects are created, after the
>>> business objects have been returned to the calling code, a cache is
>>> effectively useless since invoking something like book.getAuthor()
> basically
>>> makes a direct database request, bypassing the cache (_unless_ the cache
>>> sits between the objects and its peers, which would make it pretty
>>> Torque-specific and involve extensive modifications to Torque code, I
>>> think).
>>> 
> 
> Kelvin
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> For additional commands, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

-- 

jvz.

Jason van Zyl

http://tambora.zenplex.org
http://jakarta.apache.org/turbine
http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity
http://jakarta.apache.org/alexandria
http://jakarta.apache.org/commons



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Reply via email to