Duane Whitty wrote:
On Sunday, 13 May 2007 at 22:39:51 -0700, Garrett Cooper wrote:
Duane Whitty wrote:
Garrett,
Sounds like you're involved in a cool project. What kind of
community collaboration/involvement would be helpful to you?
Once, a long, long time ago, I wrote quite a bit of bdb 1.85
code. At that time it WAS the current version :) I might
actually remember a bit if I start working with it again.
But what would be most useful to you?
And if I may ask about a design decision: Why did you choose
a hash structure? Perhaps if you have time you could give
a little more info but whatever fits your schedule.
Good luck on your project.
Duane
Duane,
I actually chose hash structure at the time because I thought it was
appropriate for the size of the ports tree and the number of files that
may need to be used. Plus, Kris suggested that :). Given the way that
I've seen how things are used, this would be great for searching for who
added what file, finding cyclic dependencies easily, maintaining
uniqueness, etc, many common issues with the current ruby scripts.
Also, the other available BDB options like btrees seem inefficient,
over the long run :(..
I guess frequent deletions and lack of space recovery are the problem with
btrees?
Yes, that's part of it, but having to pivot the damn tree every once in
a while to get good performance is a waste of resources too. Hash tables
are of course much better at insertion / deletion as you probably well
know. Having to do (possibly) O(n) insertion and deletion with btrees
isn't good at all :(.. On hash tables its O(c) to something less than
99.9% of the time from what I know O(n) (depends on the bucket and
generation schemes of course). All that has to happen every once in a
while is the buckets capacity may increase, or the number of overall
buckets to decrease collisions, but it seems much more feasible than a
lopsided tree :).
Do you know of any simple APIs that can quickly dump fields in use
with BDB .db files? I have a hunch given the Ruby that I've taken a look at
with Portupgrade that something very inefficient's in play, but I want
to test my assumption first before jumping to conclusions.
I did a quick ports search and came up with databases/ruby-bdb1. I don't grok
ruby
but I've telling myself I should learn [sigh]. I don't know if this has a
simple
API or not; I'll take a look but I suspect it is probably overkill.
Ruby's nice, but it's built on Perl so I have suspicions on its overall
usability / speed given my experience with Perl over the past 4 months
daily for work :(.. Ruby's just the new big thing for programming
languages, so everyone's into it. Kind of like how Java was compared to
C/C++ a few years back. But once everything dies down people will
realize that they'll still have to program in C/C++/Perl for real-world
applications.
Python seems better than Ruby from what I can see, but I really don't
like the mandatory indentation thing. Ew..
If this doesn't meet your project's needs I'll try coding something up in C. I
imagine we'll need some tools written in C at some point anyhow.
That's ok. If you don't know anything right offhand that's more than a
few lines, I'll keep on hunting / prodding for documentation /
resources, and/or keep on reading the /usr/src/lib/libc/db source. I was
just looking for something that could help me get moving quickly in the
right direction.
Thank you very much for the help :)!
Well, we'll see about how much help I can be; but I'll try. It's your project
so let me know what you need or don't need/want
Thank you again though :). Having seasoned vets help will certainly
bring about good ideas and ideologies that I may not have thought of
myself, and will no doubt prove to foster better production code than I
could do by myself.
Cheers,
-Garrett
_______________________________________________
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
