I myself have found the need for such a persistence strategy. I would suggest creating an issue for this so that people can vote and follow it.
On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 10:23 AM, Peter Stavrinides < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > I have been thinking about persistence lately... and after moving all our > apps from Tapestry 4 to Tapestry 5 this past year, I have noticed distinct > patterns emerge in the way pages fit together and use persistence, and I > have been searching all the while for best practices... here are some > comments on how persistence evolved in my code: > > @Persist - I tended to use it a lot in the beginning, but far less now, I > have found it optimal not to clutter the session, and therefore persist only > a select few fields (mostly primitives). > > @Persist("flash") - I moved to flash persistence wherever I could, as it > helps limit the number of queries required, but its not always feasible to > use. On the odd occasion I also ran into problems with render methods when > pages were complex. > > I now use mostly onActivate and onPassivate, this has proven to be the most > reliable pattern, and the most scalable. It does require a bit more > boilerplate code for checking that URL parameters are passed correctly, > particularly for pages that have 'optional parameters'... the one downside > is that I have a few more queries now. > > So whats missing in an ideal world? A read in a post some time ago that > conversational patterns may be added in 5.1, that would be great! but what > would be ideal in my humble view is a proper page persistence Strategy, > where a value is retained until the user leaves the page. In truth someone > posted such a solution which used a cookie, and it seemed to behave exactly > as it should, nevertheless I am still against relying on a cookie. I > understand this may be difficult to implement due to Tapestry's inner > workings, particularly the way pages are pooled, but since conversational > state covers some of this ground (the difference being a conversation is > tied to not only the page, but the window so each tab is treated as a new > conversation), I thought to at least to ask if it could be considered at > some point if at all feasible. I would also love to hear other peoples > thoughts/opinions on this. > > cheers, > Peter > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >