[ZODB-Dev] Storage Interfaces

[David Pratt]

Bottom line is that storage methods need to be executed on both sides. I 
don't think the storages need to care what or how objects are 
transported nor what version of zope you are using so long as in the 
end, the object is one that can be used by a storage method - and that 
the storage methods are compatible with the older zopes (which seems to 
be what you are concerned about). At least this is how I am looking at 
it - whether it is zope 2 or 3, it should not matter if they are methods 
that can act on ZODB and are suited to the zodb version. In any case, 
thats the direction I have been going.

On top of it, who wants a transport that does only one thing, that can 
get tired pretty fast. There are many more possibilities than exchanging 
zodb data using a more generic transport. That's the other key reason I 
tossed out my attempt to replicate ZEO directly using twisted - if you 
want to think a bit beyond ZEO.

Regards,
David

Jim Fulton wrote:
> 
> On Apr 28, 2007, at 9:13 AM, David Pratt wrote:
> ...
>> As far as compatibility, I am not sure the past always needs to equal 
>> the future. It is probably the methods for zrpc that are important, 
>> not the transport - at least that is my thinking.
> 
> I can use current ZEO servers with ZODB 3.2 clients running in very old 
> versions of Zope (2.6 and 2.7).  This is extremely useful to me at this 
> point.  I couldn't do this if I changed the wire protocol.
> 
> Jim
> 
> -- 
> Jim Fulton            mailto:jim at zope.com        Python Powered!
> CTO                 (540) 361-1714            http://www.python.org
> Zope Corporation    http://www.zope.com        http://www.zope.org
> 
> 
>