myfaces-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sean Schofield <sean.schofi...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [jira] Created: (MYFACES-98) Allow x:dataTable to store its data model in the component tree
Date Tue, 01 Feb 2005 04:56:00 GMT
There are definitely a lot of situations where you would expect the
data to change like this.   The program I am working on right now is
an application that users use during the course of the day to update
their progress on various documents.  Often times you will have
multiple people making changes to those documents at similar times.  
Of course the default should be to skip storage of the data model so
that in your case where you don't worry about that sort of thing, you
don't have the overhead of storing the model.

Also, there are plenty of times where the changes in the data model
won't cause a problem.  A table that displays a report that is read
only will not be an issue.  Its only when you have a hyperlink or
editable value in the table where you could potentially run into
problems.

Anyways it sounds like this feature is already available in
x:dataTable.  Nice :-)

sean


On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 22:25:05 -0600, Heath Borders
<heath.borders@gmail.com> wrote:
> Well, I guess I'm thinking that you're in a somewhat specialized case
> where you cannot guarantee synchronized access to data throughout a
> session.
> 
> For me, I'm generally able to do simple CRUD operations without the
> data changing behind me.  I could see that being a problem though if
> multiple users are allowed access to the same data.
> 
> 
> On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 18:11:10 -0500, Sean Schofield
> <sean.schofield@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Your explanation of the problem here makes a little more sense to me
> > > now.  I support this change.  Hopefully, most people wouldn't have to
> > > use it, but if you're operating with really volatile data, I could see
> > > how it could solve a lot of problems.
> >
> > What do you mean by "really volatile data"?  It would seem that the
> > only existing way around this would be to make your managed bean have
> > session scope.  Would you consider volatile to mean data that can
> > change at some point during the session?  A session can go on for
> > hours if a user is active enough.
> >
> > I am glad that you agree that the feature should be added.  Maybe I
> > can convince you that is more useful than you think ... Or maybe you
> > can convince me of another way to solve the problem?  I've only
> > recently started thinking about this problem so maybe there is another
> > solution out there.  If so, I am definitely interested to know what it
> > would be.  This enhancement may seem like overkill but I can't think
> > of any other way around the problem.
> >
> > I strongly suspect that this is one of the reasons that <x:saveState>
> > was created (although we'd have to check with the creators of
> > saveState to be sure.)
> >
> > > -Heath Borders-Wing
> >
> > sean
> >
> 
> 
> --
> -Heath Borders-Wing
> hborders@mail.win.org
>

Mime
View raw message