On 8/8/05, Werner Guttmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hmm ... the fact that EHCache uses serialization internally does not
> really bother me. Here's why: a couple of weeks ago, when trying to
> complete a possible patch for CASTOR-1102, I came to realize that
> Coherence requires all objects stored in its cache classes to implement
> java.io.Serializable. Whilst initially I didn't like this idea at all, I
> came to realize quite quickly that it was really easy to refactor Castor
> in such a way that both the OID and the newly introduced CacheEntry
> classes implement Serializable.
I was either not aware of this or I forgot about it.
> With regards to the casting taking place, I came to realize that we
> don't store the actual object instances in the cache. What is actually
> stored is an array of field values, most of which all time are of
> 'primitive' types and thus Serializable by default.
What if one of those fields is a complex object that is not serializable?
Bruce
--
perl -e 'print unpack("u30","D0G)[EMAIL
PROTECTED]&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E<D\!G;6%I;\"YC;VT*"
);'
The Castor Project
http://www.castor.org/
Apache Geronimo
http://geronimo.apache.org/
-------------------------------------------------
If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please
send an empty message to the following address:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-------------------------------------------------
