Re: Applause for ZODB! And a question: How do you get pending change info from a transaction object?

> On May 1, 2018, at 7:25 AM, Jim Fulton <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> ZODB is fundamentally at odds with Asynchronous programming because loading objects into cache is transparent by design.  This means that any object access is potentially blocking.  The alternative is to stick an await in front of every object access, which is gross IMO. (Await is a disease that will likely take over most applications that use it.) 


:sigh: This may be why I feel fundamentally sad for what I understand of Guillotina's direction, which seems to throw away ZODB and ZCA and keep at most a few idioms, all in the name of bending to asyncio.  Ironic, given the product nomenclature.  If I was not too busy, I would build a NewtDB-based JSON-over-HTTP resource server in the same space... I'm working on archival digital asset management tools for academic libraries in my day job, so there's appeal to the existence of such a product — maybe some day.

Sean

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "zodb" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.