[Chandler-dev] [Sum] The Great Architecture Discussion of
Phillip J. Eby
pje at telecommunity.com
Tue Oct 9 16:12:49 PDT 2007
At 03:34 PM 10/9/2007 -0700, D John Anderson wrote:
>Hmm. I think the repository is pretty separate from the app. For
>example, it would be pretty easy to replace the repository as long as
>the replacement had a similar API.
That's a bit like saying you could replace a bicycle with a
motorcycle as long as you could find a motorcycle whose speed is
controlled by pedalling. :)
>Changing the API would be a
>problem if the replacement didn't provide the necessary features the
Some repository features are used mainly by CPIA, for data that we
don't necessarily need to *store* in the repository. If we stopped
storing those things, we could use a replacement that traded off
those features for better performance.
> It's hard to imagine any data access mechanism whose API
>would not affect the code that used the API.
This isn't really the crucial issue; it's, "what parts of the code
have to know about implementation details?" Currently, application
code "knows" things it shouldn't have to know, regardless of the
back-end, which makes experimenting with alternatives more difficult.
More information about the chandler-dev