At 9:24 AM -0500 5/4/00, Phillip J. Eby wrote:

At 10:29 PM 5/3/00 -0500, Jimmie Houchin wrote: [snip]

...

What would complement Rack storage well and is basically the topic is multifile ZODB. If the ZODB had multifile capability and each Rack could name it's file and path that the ZODB uses. Then we would have an excellent balance between transparency of storage and capabilities.

Yes. But not so much multifile ZODB, as multi-*storage* ZODB or multi-ZODB. I'd like to see a way for getting at (and managing) connections to other ZODB's from within the "primary" ZODB. Rack already has the dropdown and some stub routines for using this; all I need is what to put in 'em. :)

When I stop to think about what your saying I agree. My initial goals did not so much as require multiple files per se, but multi-storage. Just like a RDBMS can have multiple tables in a single file. As with RDBMS the app developer here should not have to be concerned with the physical layout of the data. That is purely the concern of the db. In this case ZODB. The only primary gain multi-file would bring is allowing for great db size on some oses. If my thinking isn't straight on this, feel free to fix it. :) Thanks, Jimmie Houchin