Martijn Pieters wrote:
On 8/9/07, Chris Withers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Indeed, but it's still a storage, there's no reason for it not to do
conflict resolution itself. I thought it did ;-)
It's not a storage at all.
Really? I'm pretty sure it implements the relevent storage interfaces
otherwise it wouldn't slot in the place of FileStorage...
It's a stub for the actual storage which
lives in the server.
That stub *could* do conflict resolution for client-side connects, I
thought it did, but it looks like it doesn't.
Wouldn't it be beneficial if it *did* do conflict resolution?
(afterall, if the conflict can be resolved on the client, why go all the
way to the storage server to do the conflict resolution there?)
"Wouldn't it be nice" is a big difference from "I thought it did" :-)
Yes well, I hoped it was the latter, but it looks like it's the former :-(
It would be nice, but I am not sure it can do it. Conflicts are
detected at the storage level, and as that level lives in the ZEO
server, that's where resolution has to take place. Propagating the
conflict back to the client because it *may* do conflict resolution
would be less efficient still, as in most cases there is no conflict
I'm only talking about having ClientStorage resolve conflict between the
threads of that client, not about propagating conflicts between clients,
that *would* be nuts ;-)
Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting
Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -