Yes, page ids are unique within session. I don't think the branch actually increments page Id anywhere, so far It's more like a concept. The reason why it doesn't version pages yet is that pages and components are only mocked at this point. The branch demonstrates new request processing and request cycle. Pages and components are just simple, rather dummy implementations.
-Matej On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 5:02 PM, Johan Compagner <[email protected]> wrote: > i have to look at the code. (been 4 days in barcelona so not online that > much) > but i guess you increment the page id by asking the session? (and not just > pageid++) > > but yes in the diskstore we only need 1 unique (session) id per page > version. > > johan > > > On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 16:54, Matej Knopp <[email protected]> wrote: > >> We don't. My experimental branch only has page id. Instead of >> incrementing version number I just increment page Id. >> >> -Matej >> >> On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 4:47 PM, Johan Compagner <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > I dont think thats to much of a problem but do think about that also the >> > DiskStore is using it to generate its versions for the pages >> > see SecondLevelCachePageVersionManager >> > >> > So we still need something that generates a version number... >> > >> > On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 23:03, Igor Vaynberg <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > >> >> can we yank ipageversionmanager and ichange out of 1.5? it has always >> >> been broken because no one implements ichange objects to keep the page >> >> state consistent. >> >> >> >> the downside is that if someone is using httpsessionstore they will >> >> take a bigger hit on session usage because every version is serialized >> >> in its entirety. the up side is that it will actually work and the >> >> code can be vastly simplified. >> >> >> >> any concerns? >> >> >> >> -igor >> >> >> > >> >
