Re: Components and the Memory Game
Re: Components and the Memory Game
- Subject: Re: Components and the Memory Game
- From: Cornelius Jaeger <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 22:48:49 +0100
hi chuck
it's kind of tricky, there is basically one root object, and the xml
descends from that.
everything are convoluted and strange relationships based on the root
object.
i've gone the easy way and written a small scheduler which i run as a
separate app and just let that take care of it.
that way it won't interfere with the UI. the only pain is that the xml
generated can be several MB's in size, and loading all those objects
in memory is horrible.
ERXRecursiveBatchFetch was really awesome for this to minimize the db
time though, thanks for that lenny, if you're still here.
so at the moment i'm still using the component and generate it in one
go, then write the contentString() to a file.
i'm kind of misusing the wocomponent i guess. it was just so
convenient to map the bindings.
temptation, too strong....
On 11.02.2008, at 17:41, Chuck Hill wrote:
On Feb 10, 2008, at 2:37 PM, Cornelius Jaeger wrote:
Hi All
Since i'm just a little lazy in certain aspects of my character i
was wondering the following:
I have a component that generates a proprietary xml to interface
with some legacy software.
Turns out that the xml can get really large, requiring lots of
objects.
I figured i could put the XML together using something like Wonders
ERXFetchSpecificationBatchIterator, and append to a text file and
then send that off.
However, wouldn't it be neat to be able to use a component as such?
Sort of cycling through part of a component, then generating a
response for that, append to xml file, gc, repeat until done. It
would be tricky to know where in the component to break, but maybe
inserting a comment tag that lets the system know when to break and
append to the xml file could work?
And a repetition seems like a natural place to cycle editing
contexts. Maybe every 10 rows or so, depending on the complexity of
the xml.
Has anyone got some pointers on how to do this?
Is it a waste of time?
You could probably just create it, use set... methods to set the
objects and then manually call appendToResponse on it. Repeat "use
set... methods to set the objects and then manually call
appendToResponse on it" as needed.
Chuck
--
Practical WebObjects - for developers who want to increase their
overall knowledge of WebObjects or who are trying to solve specific
problems.
http://www.global-village.net/products/practical_webobjects
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden