On Apr 22, 2006, at 5:14 PM, Jesus Cea wrote:

> The problem with current approach is "false conflict". The cost of
> redoing an entire transaction, unnecessary, to cope with false
> conflicts
> seems pretty high.

How frequent are conflicts that could be avoided this way,
and how costly are they?

In our applications, the time required to get a page out is almost
always very short if all of the required objects are present in memory.
The cost of a false conflict is only that short amount of time.

If my memory is right, our applications often get attributes many tens
of thousands of times for a single page.  Keeping attribute access
time as low as possible makes every page faster, and the cost
of conflicts, especially false ones, is kept lower.

I really like the Persistent and PersistentBase classes as they are.