[ZODB-Dev] Commit seems to succeed but does'nt

[Cyril Elkaim]

	Christian,

	Yes, I undestand that. Our problem is not the Mapping by itself. Our 
problem is that we have multiple users that access and *modify* objects, 
and that we have conflict even if they are different objects because we 
put the directly in 'root'. To avoi this we must find an another data 
organisation. We admit it's not simple and we are searching for solutions.
	My goal was to use Mapping objects only for indexes and store the objects 
themselves flat in the database. Each object having all its subs by itself.

	Cyril


Christian Robottom Reis wrote:

> On Wed, 26 Sep 2001, Cyril Elkaim wrote:
> 
> I think you haven't yet understood the real benefit the ZODB offers, which
> is transparent persistence in Python (avoiding embedding SQL, which IMHO
> is something of a hack). The downside is that you need to make your
> retrieval facility yourself, since none if offered beyond the root
> mapping.
> 
> For simple applications, you could get away with named mappings referring
> to your top-level object collections; however, this is very
> domain-specific and without understanding your domain, I would be hard
> pressed to suggesting how to organize your persistence mechanism.
> 
> As a bynote, the cool part is really the transparency and how it fits in
> nicely with Python's instance/class semantics. Being able to save stuff
> just subclassing, instantiating and doing get_transaction().commit() is
> almost too good to be true.
> 
> Take care,
> --
> Christian Reis, Senior Engineer, Async Open Source, Brazil.
> http://async.com.br/~kiko/ | [+55 16] 272 3330 | NMFL
> 
>