Re: [OJB-developers] ObjectCache and IdentityFactory]

[<Joa...@tp...>]

I'll keep this on-list, ok?

>>> Making it configurable is a good idea. We can have different
>>> behaviour for different environemnts (e.g. singlevm mode, C/S mode,
>>> running within a J2EE app server ...)
>
> Are you thinking of making this configurable at runtime?  Say, with
> an xml or properties file?

I've thought about OJB.properties. BaseConfiguration now neatly supports
this kind of stuff.

>> well, actually I like doing this kind of stuff every now and then
>> (everyone who did such a beast once probably understands, why I
>> don't like to do it all the time ;-).
>
> Kudos for taking it up. :)

ok, but before I start this I'd like to have your views:
- Which pools/Factories should the new class/classes replace/support? (
ServerPool, BrokerPool, ObjectCacheXXXImpl, ...?)
- How generic should it be? ("just what we need now", "what we might need
in the next 3 month", "does it make coffee?")
- Should it be generic enough to be useable outside of ojb? (almost the
same as the one above).
- What level of configurability would anyone need (No "magic numbers" at
all? everything configureable?)
- Should there really be one monster class or rather several specialized
classes with a common infrastructure?
- Whats your favourite colour?

and of course any thoughts that come to your mind.

btw, I realized, that although the new/old server is rather loaded during
the day it got some spare capacities at night (it takes just 7 minutes to
generate doxygen & javadoc for our project, compared to 2 minutes with the
old server). So I might still be able to set up some automated testing.
Anyone tried doxygen? It's pretty neat to view the interaction and class
hierarchies in bigger projects. I'll build doxygen documentation for ojb
for myself frequently, anyone interested in a sample? The first one is
always free.


regards
Joachim Sauer