Le 23 août 07 à 07:33, Yen-Ju Chen a écrit :

> On 8/20/07, Yen-Ju Chen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On 8/20/07, Quentin Mathé <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Hi everybody,
>>>
>>> Here is a lengthy mail to describe a proposal about a Tag Object
>>> System which would be implemented by an improved version of
>>> OrganizeKit playing the role of CoreObject name service. It is
>>> inspired by OrganizeKit itself and a discussion on SILC with David.
>>
>>   One thing I cannot decide is how to store the data on file system.
>>   The current implementation is in a single property list.
>>   If you want to use it for everything, database may be better,
>>   but will be slightly slow.
>>   On the other hand, database ususally provides machenism for
>> transaction while property list doesn't.
>>   So that is the only thing I am concerned.
>
>   This has been mentioned before, I guess.
>   http://www.dekorte.com/projects/opensource/tagdb/

I remember we talk about it  on SILC with alex (from  XMMS2) :-)
alex took a look at it because XMMS2 is working on a similar db  
called S4. More: <http://wiki.xmms2.xmms.se/index.php/ 
New_medialib_backend>
There are explanations about their collection concepts which are very  
close to OrganizeKit ideas:
- <http://wiki.xmms2.xmms.se/index.php/Collections>
- <http://wiki.xmms2.xmms.se/index.php/Collections_Concept>
I didn't precisely remember what I thought of it, but I would say  
that OrganizeKit looks simpler yet as flexible because it stores  
everything in term of nested key/value pair. This is unlike S4 which  
enforces two triplet-types: Entry-HasProperty-Property and Entry- 
Contains-Entry. Entry-HasProperty-Property is equivalent to key/value  
pair if you consider the following plist:
{
        Entry = {
                Property = "value";
        };
}
So Entry-Contains-Entry is just a subcase probably used in order to  
achieve better performance.

>   We can seriously consider it as a backend of OrganizeKit
>   instead of property list if we plan to use it for system-wide tag.
>   I never really look at it, but two advantages I see:
>   (1) in-memory search, which is the reason OrganizeKit use  
> property list.
>   (2) transaction using qdbm, which is exact what OrganizeKit lacks  
> now.

I'm all in favor of it, API looks clean.
By the way , we should have a chat over SILC to discuss how to bring  
together OrganizeKit, TagDB and EtoileSerialize in CoreObject context.

Cheers,
Quentin.



_______________________________________________
Etoile-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/etoile-dev

Reply via email to