I'm putting a customized CMFCollector into production, and wonder whether it would be worth the time to have it use CMFBTreeFolder2 instead of SkinnedFolder. Since CMFCollector's user interface displays its contents through a catalog search instead of hitting every object, I don't know if it could even be an issue. I'm curious about the claim "but it [Zope] has trouble storing a lot of objects in a single standard folder" on Shane's page -- any clarification of that? My site will most likely have fewer than thousands, and certainly fewer than tens of thousands, of issues submitted. So, worth the time, or just go with the default? TIA, Rob __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Exclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears http://launch.yahoo.com/promos/britneyspears/
Rob Boyd wrote at 2003-10-27 10:02 -0800:
I'm putting a customized CMFCollector into production, and wonder whether it would be worth the time to have it use CMFBTreeFolder2 instead of SkinnedFolder.
The "Folder" UI becomes difficult to handle for several hundread entries. But, you may not use it anyway for your collector. The "Folder" implementation becomes inefficient for several thousands to ten thousands entries. At latest, you should use a "BTreeFolder2" derived instance when you expect to get collector entries in this order. -- Dieter
participants (2)
-
Dieter Maurer -
Rob Boyd