Coming in a bit from the side here,
we have, for some time, discussed to separate out the binary blog out of the metadata for an entirely different reason, namely to be able to weed out binary duplicates. If there was a way for us to separate out the binary parts, into something like 'binaryassetId, hashData[256], binarydata' and then just have the asset table referencing that row, I think it would help a lot. I realize it's a separate discussion, just chipping in my two cents. Best regards, Stefan Andersson Tribal Media AB Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2009 17:49:22 +0200 From: tommi.s.e.laukka...@gmail.com To: mma...@gmail.com CC: opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] Please do not revert fixes without careful comtemplation Hello, On second though we could keep the current structure and expose all fields also through AssetBase properties. Then we could save / load the AssetBase with nhibernate as a single object and leave out the Metadata property from NHibernate mapping. Does this sound good? regards, Tommi On Sat, Feb 14, 2009 at 5:06 PM, Mike Mazur <mma...@gmail.com> wrote: Hi, On Sat, Feb 14, 2009 at 4:05 PM, Tommi Laukkanen <tommi.s.e.laukka...@gmail.com> wrote: > I was talking with mikkopa and he suggested we should create two tables to > cover AssetBase to solve this issue properly. Namely AssetMetadata for > metadata information and AssetData for blobs to avoid situation where we end > up accessing also the blob data just to read metadata. I was hoping not to have to do that. It should be straightforward to support the current AssetBase/AssetMetadata composition in the existing OpenSim data layers, but as sdague warned me earlier, by mapping multiple classes to one table I was entering a world of pain. Seems that's exactly what's happening with NHibernate. The reason I introduced the AssetMetadata class is to supply metadata information only for some requests that Cable Beach, the new asset server, supports. Now I realize that this was probably a premature optimization. Instead of modifying the DB schema, we could have AssetBase inherit from AssetMetadata, as I outlined before[1]. Alternatively, we could get rid of AssetMetadata altogether and store everything in AssetBase as before, splitting out the metadata sometime in the future when a use case warrants it. What do you think? Thanks, Mike [1] https://lists.berlios.de/pipermail/opensim-dev/2009-February/004918.html
_______________________________________________ Opensim-dev mailing list Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
