On Tuesday 20 November 2001 05:35 pm, Wolfram Kerber allegedly wrote:
Hi,
i'm currently working on a product that allows to attach relational information to zope-objects. It works quite well so far, but to further enhance it i need to make some changes to the Catalog. I could perhaps implement it as a separate product, but i strongly feel that those changes are best applied to the Catalog itself, as they are of general use (i think) and involve a lot of changes to the inner workings of the Catalog. In particular i need the following:
- named/stored queries these are precompiled queries, so they can be executed without parsing and are easily cacheable i.e. similar to what is implemented in CMFTopic, but stored in the Catalog and a bit smarter
- caching support
- unions and intersections sub-queries (i.e. queries that are directed at a certain index) should be more flexibly combineable
I have some code that implements this in my CatalogQuery product. It creates a query object from a string. Presently these are not persistent, but they could easily be made to be to create precompiled queries. code at: http://www.zope.org/Members/Kaivo/CatalogQuery
I searched this mailing-list as well as zope.org to get an idea about what has already been discussed and requested, and there seems to be some interest in improving the Catalog. Some people even seem to have worked on this, perhaps they could give an update on this? Possibly i don't have to write everything from scratch...
I would be willing to help both in coding and getting the code put into the Zope core.
I would have put this into a proposal, but there already are two proposals that deal with the features i want, one is dedicated to unions/intersections, the other (TopicIndexes) to performance issues (i dont't know what's the status of these though, especially the first one is rather old), and i don't want to hijack them without asking. As so often i will need to complete my current project first, but would then like to help in improving the Catalog for a more general use.
Possibly we need to rekindle discussion. I would suggest contacting the authors of those proposals to see how compatible your concepts are wth theirs. Perhaps a new proposal should be drafted with the new ideas and ty them back to the previous ones. If there is redundancy, that can be worked out.
So, if there is interest, i would propose to collect some ideas and comments about how a better Catalog should look like, how it could be best implemented and how to organize this effort (with respect to the already existing proposals).
I am very interested in such a discussion. Let me know what I can do to help. /---------------------------------------------------\ Casey Duncan, Sr. Web Developer National Legal Aid and Defender Association c.duncan@nlada.org \---------------------------------------------------/