On 21 Nov 2003 at 8:52, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [keeping storage alive for the length of the program...]
I have to say I've never encountered this problem. I normally need storage.commit(), so I got in the habit early of keeping the storage as a module global somewhere. In fact, my typical usage pattern is opposite - I use v = storage.view(name) rather frequently (usually on any user interaction) rather than keep long-lived references to views. Those are temptations to keep long-lived references to rows, which gets you in trouble if routines can delete rows. I'll agree that lack of storage.close is kind of unusual, but you can do that with a simple proxy class. Heck, if you're on a platform that supports memory mapping and your view is large, reopening the storage & getting the view should be cheaper than view.copy(). IOW, in (blissful) ignorance of what you're actually doing, I suspect you're asking for trouble :-). -- Gordon _______________________________________________ metakit mailing list - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.equi4.com/mailman/listinfo/metakit
