directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alex Karasulu <akaras...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [ChangeLog] Destroy() method semantic
Date Thu, 29 Jan 2009 14:55:20 GMT
These are standard service management functions. Sometimes it's
start()/stop(), open()/close(), create()/destroy().  Which ever works so
long as we're consistent.

On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 9:27 AM, Emmanuel L├ęcharny <elecharny@iktek.com>wrote:

> Alex Karasulu wrote:
>
>> The method name is fine. It is intended to denote cleanup of resources
>> needed for the CL.
>>
>> This in memory CL was a very very simple proof of concept implementation.
>>  I
>> added the code to backup the content of the CL to a file which get's read
>> on
>> startup to persist changes instead of loosing them.  This mimics a real
>> persistent CL for testing purposes.  If you change this then several tests
>> will begin to fail.  The point is any CL should persist change events,
>> even
>> if this implementation is just a toy.
>>
>>
> It's a bit surprising that everything is stored on disk when you do a
> destroy()... Last time my computer was destroyed, I wish the data were
> stored on disk at the same time ;)
>
> More seriously, I understand the logic, but using close() instead of
> destroy() would have been better.
>
> --
> --
> cordialement, regards,
> Emmanuel L├ęcharny
> www.iktek.com
> directory.apache.org
>
>
>

Mime
View raw message