Ian Bicking wrote:
>On Tue, 2003-01-28 at 20:29, Stuart Donaldson wrote:
>>** Regarding the SessionMemoryStore and saving to disk. **
>>It appears unlikely from the e-mail thread that many people are using
>>the SessionMemoryStore relying on the save to disk behavior. The
>>direction I think we are leaning is to remove that capability of the
>>SessionMemoryStore, making it memory-only and not persistent.
>I don't think it's a good idea to change this, at least not at this
>point. It seems better to create a new session store
>(NonPersistentMemory or something), and perhaps to deprecate Memory
>(i.e., print a warning message). Then maybe restoring a new Memory
>behavior (i.e, reusing that name), or just adding another kind of
>I think it would be fine to include such a new session store
>(particularly if someone offers tested code for it), since it shouldn't
>effect the rest of Webware very much.
Agreed that this is not the time to change the behavior of
I think what would be useful, is a mechanism to have non-persistent data
associated with a session. But to not necessarily require that all
session data be non-persistent. This can be done now via a mechanism
similar to what I described earlier, using a non-persistent dictionary
keyed on the session, and containing the non-persistent data. However
it would be nice to have a "standard" API for this at some point.
But I digress, at this point I think even for that, it would be best to
address it after the 0.8 release. Putting something in the release adds
pressure for some level of support in the future. And if we are adding
new functionality to the release, I think it better to have it thought
out and tried for a while in development, to give others more
opportunity to comment on it and refine it. Just my 2-bits.
If someone wants to propose a NonPersistentMemory store as an
experimental feature, I could see including it. But I want to release
0.8b2 on Wednesday, and I would like ot to be a final beta prior to release.