Re: Next steps

Hi!

Cees De Groot <cdegroot@...> wrote:
> On 1/13/06, goran@... <goran@...> wrote:
> > Ok. One huge benefit with using 1-1 instead of Cees' ConnectionPool is
> > that my Seaside components can hold onto the persistent objects.
> > Otherwise they can't, because the next request will end up using a
> > different session.
>
> Be glad there's Magma - in OmniBase, you can't even transport your
> objects from transaction to transaction...

:)
 
> > Are we talking cold cache including actual file access? And how does the
> > size of the files on disk affect that?
>
> Hey, run your own benchmarks. They're just as invalid as anyone else's... :-)

Yeah, well - no time for that right now. I was just trying to pick Chris
brain a bit.

> One premature optimization you could do is to build a sort of internal
> service to access base data (hmm... only know the german/dutch word
> here - 'stammdaten') instead of talk to Magma directly. As long as
> performance is not an issue, do nothing. As soon as performance
> becomes an issue, change that interface to use a single separate Magma
> session (and maybe even a separate Magma image, whatever).
>
> That's probably all the premature optimization I would do at this moment.

Might be an idea. But I am actually not going to do even that until
needed. :)

Anyway, I just readapted my Q2Session to use 1-1, but it still uses the
pool. At least that will keep the reuse of the cached model when people
log in/out. ;)

> How many users will use this app, anyway?

350+ and perhaps up to 100 concurrently. I am busy building domain
objects and UIs right now, just want to be "prepared" especially if the
issue turns up in discussions here.

regards, Göran