[ZODB-Dev] [Problem] "_v_" variables too volatile

[Casey Duncan]

On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 15:04:32 +0000
Toby Dickenson <tdickenson at geminidataloggers.com> wrote:

> On Wednesday 10 December 2003 14:46, Casey Duncan wrote:
> 
> > An application may also wish to set this flag itself if it knows that it
> > will need this object again in subsequent transactions.
> 
> "this flag" is one that means "keep until the end of the transaction". It 
> doesnt say anything about its lifetime after the end of the transaction.
> 
> I agree it would be nice for the application to be able to tweak that too. We 
> would benefit from doing so automatically... keeping smaller objects longer 
> than large ones. But I think that needs to be a softer control, not a hard 
> boolean.
> 
> > As for the name, I agree that _p_volatile is not the best. How about:
> >
> > _p_enduring
> > _p_held
> > _p_lingering
> > _p_kept
> 
> _p_dont_deactivate_mid_transaction

Maybe just

_p_dont_deactivate

is clear enough.

-Casey