those are the kinds of things that are going to break and we have to "fix"
for terracotta somehow in their config.

-igor


On 2/21/07, Johan Compagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

really?
How are they doing the url compressor stuff then?
Or i guess they have special support for soft/weak References ..
because you can't serialize a weak or soft reference.

If you make a test, use the WebCompressing strategy and look what happens
with the URLCompressor class.

johan


On 2/21/07, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> right, thats what i meant
>
> -igor
>
>
> On 2/21/07, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > And they don't have to. At least not according to what they are doing
> with
> > it.
> >
> > Eelco
> >
> > On 2/21/07, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > they dont
> > >
> > > -igor
> > >
> > >
> > > On 2/21/07, Johan Compagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > i am very interested how the handle the special serialization
cases.
> > > > like readObject and writeObject methods or writeReplace..
> > > >
> > > > johan
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 2/21/07, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Looking forward to it! I just started checking out Terracotta
> > today...
> > > > >
> > > > > One of the great things about Terracotta that I wasn't aware of
> > > > > yesterday, as that Terracotta can fail over when you run out of
> > memory
> > > > > on a box. And that's kind of the same thing (not quite, but in
the
> > > > > same line of thought) we are trying to achieve with our new
> session
> > > > > store implementation. The SLCSS implementation will always have
> the
> > > > > advantage that there is unlimited back button support. For what
it
> > is
> > > > > worth. But I think that even running Terracotta on the same
> machine
> > -
> > > > > when the Terracotta server runs out of RAM it'll start using the
> > disk
> > > > > - to prevent running out of memory is a viable option. And
> > Terracotta
> > > > > is by default a lot more efficient in how it does that than any
> > normal
> > > > > serialization based solution out there.
> > > > >
> > > > > Anyway, like I said, I think we should definitively look in this
> > > > > direction as well. We already were in fact, but it deserves more
> > > > > priority.
> > > > >
> > > > > Ryan, we'll be very interested to hear your experiences with it.
> > > > >
> > > > > Eelco
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to