As a storage server or as an rpc? It would actually be pretty complex for persistent objects unless you had replication implemented (which no one to my knowledge has done with BDB+Elephant) because in the most straightforward implementation you would have to have the same persistent ids and slot values on both machines to pass persistent references back and forth and to avoid network traffic on slot access.
You could do something like Robert's DCM where you 'checked out' objects from the central server and could do RPC calls back to update or to transform a given object. This usage model might not be as hard to implement. Ian On Oct 22, 2008, at 1:45 PM, Robert Synnott wrote: > Thanks :) > I ended up going with nasty derived indices for the time being for my > multiple-index-query problem. > > It strikes me that it would be useful to have a relatively high-level > server with a BDB store, that knew about the same objects as the > clients, and could have methods acting on those object sent to it for > speed, stored-procedure-like. Sadly, I certainly don't have the time > to do this right now. :) > Rob > > _______________________________________________ > elephant-devel site list > elephant-devel@common-lisp.net > http://common-lisp.net/mailman/listinfo/elephant-devel _______________________________________________ elephant-devel site list elephant-devel@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/mailman/listinfo/elephant-devel
