On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 11:40 PM, Daniel Cheng
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 7:29 AM, Matthew Toseland
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Ian and I have eventually come to the conclusion that we should include db4o,

Yay.

>> Of course there will be latency here when objects are
>> not cached, so we will need to cache a few request choices in advance for
>> each RequestStarter. And we will need to devise some way to deal with
>> requests that don't want to be persisted - presumably we'd keep them in RAM.
>
> Please don't.
> According to what I have read, db4o should be good enough to use directly:

I agree with Daniel, DIY may be an admirable quality when it comes to
home and car repair, but not with software.

One of the benefits of using third-party stuff like db4o is that we
can outsource problems to people far more focussed on the solutions to
those problems than we can afford to be.

If we spot a problem, we should fix it, but let's not fall into the
"premature optomization" trap.

Ian.

-- 
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cell: +1 512 422 3588
Skype: sanity
_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
Devl@freenetproject.org
http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Reply via email to