Stanislav Sedov a écrit :
On Fri, 11 May 2007 02:10:05 +0200
Ivan Voras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> mentioned:
- I think it's time to give up on using BDB+directory tree full of text
files for storing the installed packages database, and I propose all of
this be replaced by a single SQLite database. SQLite is public domain
(can be slurped into base system), embeddable, stores all data in a
single file, lightweight, fast, and can be used to do fancy things such
as reporting.
What is the reason to use SQL-based database? You'll perform direct
queries to database? The packaging system is for ordinal users, not sql
geeks, so they should not have to use sql for managing packages. So a
simple set of hashes will suffer or needs. I agree with Julian that we
should have a backup of packaging database in plain text format, and
utility to rebuild it. This way we can always restore the database if
something goes wrong. Furhtermore, that should not make a great impact
on performance, since we don't have to rebuild it every day.
I agree with Stan ;)
"fast and improved" package utilities uses mainly some indexed berkeley
DB combined with flat files, aren't they? I, and may be many other
FreeBSD users use light systems for efficiency and eaiser management, if
we use some database system it will require Disk Space, ressources for
the DB to run, dependencies and so on... And we also may be exposed to a
"that DB is better" war ;)
- A quick test confirms that the current bsdtar will happily ignore any
extra data at the end of a tgz/tbz archive, so package metadata can be
embedded there, thus conserving existing infrastructure and being fast
to parse. I suggest encoding this metadata in a sane and easy to parse
XML structure.
I cannot currently actively participate in implementing proposed things,
but I can give advice on sqlite, database and xml schemas if anyone
wants to...
Why use XML for that? It's hard to parse and hard to read format, and I
personally see no benefits of using it. If you're suggesting XML a
simple bracket-structure format (like bind's config) will fit our needs
much better (easier to parse and read and same benefits as XML). Also
we might consider YAML, thought I like this idea much fewer.
XML could be an altertative to order packages, it can be parsed with
some limited dependencies like PERL. The userland tools to manage
packages could be based on that language? It is well known by many
users, quite simple, required by many other packages so the whole system
won't be much heavier. PERL XML Parser can't be a good choice?
* PERL-DB for managing packages databases
* PERL-XML for parsing categories, dependencies ...
PERL also give , in most cases, good performance issues.
This is solely ma humble opinion ;)
--
Stanislav Sedov
ST4096-RIPE
_______________________________________________
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
