On Feb 14, 2008, at 7:21 AM, Binger David wrote:
On Feb 13, 2008, at 11:28 PM, Paul Winkler wrote:
Catalogs and session data change much faster than content. It
to pack these more frequently. On large system, it provides the
spread load over multiple servers, if necessary.
Also, as I understand it, you can get more benefits from the "regular
content" ZODB cache if you're not constantly moving tons of catalog
data through it, so there's a performance win
It seems like all of these potential advantages are available through
the use of multiple storages, but none of them really require
support for cross-storage references. On the other hand, it seems
clear that cross-storage references make the system as a whole
(software + people) less reliable.
I don't agree in general.
Perhaps I misunderstand, but low-level cross-site references seem
weakrefs. Maybe we'd be better off if they were explicit, higher-
used and dereferenced intentionally where required.
I don't object to this approach. I'll note that we had an approach
like this before for Zope (mounts) and it had plenty of disadvantages
of it's own, including injecting Zope-specific code into ZODB.
If someone can make something like this work without modifying ZODB, I
I think it would be easier to make the current multi-database approach
a bit more explicit. I'll probably do that.
For more information about ZODB, see the ZODB Wiki:
ZODB-Dev mailing list - ZODB-Dev@zope.org