On Mon, 13 Dec 1999, Geoff Hutchison wrote:
> Except we don't even have a good set of tools for working with the db
> right now! The problem with the existing Perl scripts isn't that Berkely
> is a foreign language (one could argue that it's easier for Perl than
> SQL), but they can't decode the data itself.
As a user of HTDig, this is the primary reason for a SQL backend.
To me HTDig as it sits is great; the only thing missing is the ability for
non-coders to manipulate the data themselves. What would make the most
sense would be to provide full data access, both read AND write. Then I
can take my dig results, dump them into whatever I use as a data tool.
Manipulate until I get what I want, then dump to htdig databases. It seems
that a lot of people spend a lot of time getting htdig to index only what
they want where they could spend very little time massaging the data in
another tool.
Again, I think the primary reason for a SQL backend is data access, not
performance.
Bill Carlson
------------
Systems Programmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Opinions are mine,
Virtual Hospital http://www.vh.org/ | not my employer's.
University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics |
------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the htdig3-dev mailing list, send a message to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
You will receive a message to confirm this.
