[Zope] Re: SESSION updates don't always take

[Malcolm Cleaton]

On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 17:12:43 -0500, Chris Kratz wrote:
> On Wednesday 09 March 2005 05:09 pm, Chris McDonough wrote:
>> Yup, this is a common issue that bites many people when they do ZODB
>> programming.  For better or worse, we've made the scripter into a ZODB
>> programmer via offering sessions.
> 
> The sad thing is that I knew this to be the case with standard ZODB 
> programming.  Hence the huch.  What I didn't realize is that the SESSION code 
> worked the same way for some reason.
> 
> Oh well, thanks again.

While we're on the topic of the one downside of making Session objects
ZODB objects like any other, I thought I'd jump in and point out the
advantage. I've worked with other systems where sessions are just a
standard in-memory object, and this is a much nicer approach.

Since sessions are ZODB objects, you can switch to store your sessions in
a database, or in memory on a ZEO server, just by playing with your
configuration. All the usual ZODB mechanisms for transaction handling and
changed-object invalidation come into play for free, giving you a
distributed and/or fully persistent session store which is much easier to
use and set up than most, and with far fewer limitations on the structure
of your session data.

Thanks,
Malcolm.


-- 

    [] j a m k i t
      web solutions for charities

         malcolm cleaton
T:  020 7549 0520
F:  020 7490 1152
M:  07986 563852
W: www.jamkit.com