I honestly, fully, 100% agree with you. Just my USD .02.
El jue, 01-09-2005 a las 12:56 +0200, Alexander Larsson escribió: > I don't understand why a SQL server would be any slower than read() and > write(). I mean, it would still end up doing read/write calls. It seems > to me that all it does is highly complicating a simple key/value system. > And furthermore, doing i/o synchronously is definitely a no-no since not > doing that is at the core of the nautilus design. > > I'm not saying the current system is great, but I don't see using an SQL > database as a better solution than just fixing stuff to be better. > Databases tend to have all sorts of complications like on-disk format > changes, complexity of installation, opaque file-formats, locking issue > with shared homedirs, fragility (if some part goes bad the whole db can > be corrupt), etc. Furthermore, we wouldn't have much use for most of the > features you get from an SQL database. > > =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= > Alexander Larsson Red Hat, Inc > [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] > He's a fast talking playboy paramedic plagued by the memory of his family's > brutal murder. She's a bloodthirsty foul-mouthed doctor with an evil twin > sister. They fight crime! > -- Manuel Amador <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.amautacorp.com/ +593 (4) 220-7010 -- nautilus-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/nautilus-list
