Marcus Denker <marcus at ira.uka.de> wrote:

> If we have a good persistent object store, couldn't we store everything
> inside? I'd like to see the image to be more like a database, 
> things are loaded on demand, no need to save the image (done automatically).
> (Of course we need to have some kind of "snapshot and rollback" mechanism).
> This persistent Object store would contain all the objects, the source, 
> and changes). We'd have two files: the "image" and the VM.

This is the direction I'd like Squeak in general to take as well, but I
don't see it being done by SqC. However, I plan on taking Dynapad in
that direction.  I plan on keeping quite a bit in a central database-
applications and data.  In a perfect world, also image segments of
existing classes that aren't used as often.  Perhaps some hacking to
SystemDictionary to allow loading on demand.  To get a prototype of
something like this wouldn't be hard, but I imagine getting something
that works really nicely will take a bit of tweaking.

There have been announcements of a few new OODBs for Squeak, so I plan
on evaluating them when they come out, rather than just sticking with
MinneStore.

Aaron