On Thu, 18 Apr 2002 16:23:15 +0000 (UTC), Florent Guillaume <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>This reminds me of a question I had: given that (from what I understand) >_v_ attributes only live in the object cache of a given Zope, True, and more accurate that I think you expected.... The issue is that one Zope has more than one ZODB object cache, even without ZEO. There is one per worker thread. Each cache has independant _v_ attributes >Here I'm thinking specifically of LDAPUserFolder. Suppose a user hits >ZEOclient1, which caches in _v_* his info. Then the same user hits >ZEOclient2 and changes some info in LDAP. This new info is cached on >ZEOclient2. When the user goes back to ZEOclient1, he will see old data. yes. Ive never looked at LDAPUserFolder so this may be irrelevant, but is it possible for LDAPUserFolder to validate that the cached _v_ information is still fresh? If that validation is quicker than fetching a new copy then this is still an overall win. >Should _v_ never be used like that ? If data consistency is an absolute requirement, then you *have* to hit some shared storage on every transaction. Toby Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
