Would it be difficult to replace the storage layer and use another storage layer like Hibernate for example.... ? In that way you only have to deal with the core functionality and let the storage stuff being implemented by something else.
Marco >Eduard Witteveen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >We need to find a good maintainer for the postgres storage layer and for >> >now it looks like every postgress version will need it's own storage layer. >> Well, if this is the only point on were it misbehaviours, im prepared to >> create an Postgres73.java. >> -but- then the lookup.xml should point to the proper classes, and not >> the storage classes (all lookup_postgresql.xml info points to > >What is 'proper' in this era? I think that the 'preferred' implementations are the >'storage' classes >(certainly in an 'unstable' branch). But the storage postgresql implementation does >indeed seem a >bit too simple. On the other hand, I'm getting the impression that we mainly work >around the bugs >and limitations of postgresql.. (for example the lack of the possiblity to use >foreign keys seems to >me rather stupid). > >> postgresql.xml --> org.mmbase.storage.database.PostgreSqlStorage >> Why has this been changed and by whom? (also: lookup_postgresql.xml is >> not an valid xml!) > >lookup_posgresql.xml is only a way to clean up lookup.xml a bit, and is not intended >as a >stand-alone xml. I noticed that Resin's xml-parser did choke on it, so perhaps I'd >change it back >:-( > > Michiel > >-- >mihxil' Michiel Meeuwissen >Mediapark C101 Hilversum >+31 (0)35 6772979 >[]()
