Re: [boost] [rdb] rdb/persistent integration

Subject: Re: [boost] [rdb] rdb/persistent integration
From: strasser_at_[hidden]
Date: 2009-10-05 07:48:23

>> also, you could use more than one resource managers at a time, so you could
>> have distributed transactions between two databases, between a file and a
>> database, etc., and can have references across resources. (a locator can
>> reference an object in any resource, and can be stored as part of an object)
>>
> Very interesting project. At this point my feeling is that there is room
> to slip not one but two of my libs under yours !
>

what`s the other library?

btw, I wasn`t suggesting we should merge our libraries.
a stand-alone sql db layer definitely makes sense.
even a standalone o-r mapper might make sense, depending on what kind  
of user interface you planned for it. it might e.g. be better for some  
use cases to give the user more control over when and how actual SQL  
is produced and objects are stored than my library does. much like my  
resource manager uses Boost.Serialization, but doesn`t replace  
Boost.Serialization.
remember that my intent was a user interface as close as possible to  
using regular objects in memory, so there is no "store this object  
now" function. the resource manager is free to cache and postpone  
accesses to the storage engine, as long as it guarantees that the  
object is stored on transaction::commit the latest.

but we should work together on "linking" the libraries, i.e.  
implementing a boost.persistent resource manager that uses your o-r  
mapper, in the current design.
or merge your o-r mapper library with my library, but leave the sql db  
layer a seperate library.
depending on the o-r mapper interface you planned.