On 9 Dec 2005, at 16:46, Tim Peters wrote:
I'm asking because I'm planning a pretty complex storage layer, which
would benefit from more complex OIDs (for instance bigger strings, or
tuples of (str, int)).
An oid is a low-level implementation thingie, and IMO that's
the right place to put complexity. If you don't expect to have
2**N objects, an oid that requires more than N bits is in some sense
extravagant ;-). In any case, you should be able to use "bigger
now without changing anything.
Oh I agree, but if my storage (think SQL) has internally other kinds
of identifiers, like autoincremented integer primary keys, and
several tables depending on object kind, I want to reuse its concepts
and pack them into an oid like 'footable_12345'.
Anyway thanks for the answers, I know in what direction to move now.
Florent Guillaume, Nuxeo (Paris, France) Director of R&D
+33 1 40 33 71 59 http://nuxeo.com [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more information about ZODB, see the ZODB Wiki:
ZODB-Dev mailing list - ZODB-Dev@zope.org