On Tuesday 15 April 2008 14:29, Daniel Cheng wrote: > On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 6:33 PM, Matthew Toseland > <toad at amphibian.dyndns.org> wrote: > > > > On Tuesday 15 April 2008 01:16, Daniel Cheng wrote: > > > On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 6:07 AM, Matthew Toseland > > > <toad at amphibian.dyndns.org> wrote: > > > > On Monday 14 April 2008 08:53, j16sdiz at freenetproject.org wrote: > > > > > Author: j16sdiz > > > > > Date: 2008-04-14 07:53:47 +0000 (Mon, 14 Apr 2008) > > > > > New Revision: 19306 > > > > > > > > > > Modified: > > > > > trunk/freenet/src/freenet/store/BerkeleyDBFreenetStore.java > > > > > trunk/freenet/src/freenet/store/FreenetStore.java > > > > > trunk/freenet/src/freenet/store/RAMFreenetStore.java > > > > > Log: > > > > > change javadoc and RAMFS.put() to match BDBFS.put() behaviour > > > > > > > > Eh? Did you actually read BDBFS.put() ? > > > > > > Yes, what it do is a StorableBlock.equals(), which doesn't check the > > > actual data afaik. > > > > And now you don't even do that in RAMFS? Or am I missing something? PS it does > > check the data. > > Revert it then. > > I am working on a new datastore, which have pluggable index and file storage.
There should be a BDBFS plugin. Then we can get rid of the old BDBFS code. But also an index-in-RAM plugin etc... it would open up the way to lots of different backends, maybe one of them will be both stable and fast. :) > > Do you think online database reconstruction is doable? That would need putting > the database into a readonly mode temporary. Not sure if our routing algorithm > can handle that. This is an interesting idea. It would in all likelihood be detectable remotely; it would result in data being rerequested that didn't need to be rerequested (freesites if the user browses them, but especially persistent downloads). Having said that, some time soon after 0.7.0 ships we will have proper persistent downloads... and the datastore is remotely probeable right now anyway. In the future, we'll have a separate, possibly ephemeral, client-layer-only cache, for freesites etc. Certainly it wouldn't break the routing algorithm, although it would introduce some noise. It's simply a question of whether it would have any security impact. It may be a good idea, certainly it would improve usability. Although just the recent changes to reconstruction plus not reading the store file unless we need to should speed up reconstruction considerably. > > Regards, > Daniel Cheng -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20080415/7c79ae86/attachment.pgp>
