On Jan 17, 2013, at 11:54 AM, Robin Sommer <[email protected]> wrote: > I like the idea of having a transparent key-value store that's both > distributed and persistent.
Oh, this might work and have the additional benefit of being very simple and easy to implement and remember how it works. We'd basically be severely restricting what people can do so that we can do more stuff automatically. > Actually it wouldn't be a single key-value store but scripts should be > able to create new, separate ones on demand. And they can specify with > which nodes to sync each with; or maybe other nodes could subscribe to > individual stores by their name. Maybe lets call the stores "views". I like this and it could be the first step toward the data distribution and persistence framework (data framework?) we were talking about. So far I had been having a hard time figuring out what this would look like but I was probably trying to make it too complicated too. If I think within the boundaries you are laying out in the proposal, I can imagine creating everything I want in the scripting land. I like it so far, I'll have to do a bit more thinking and maybe some example scripting to find edge cases where it might not work or be particularly burdensome. .Seth -- Seth Hall International Computer Science Institute (Bro) because everyone has a network http://www.bro-ids.org/ _______________________________________________ bro-dev mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.icsi.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/bro-dev
