Bertrand Dunogier wrote: > > > 2010/6/25 André Rømcke <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > > On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 4:56 PM, André Rømcke <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Key Value store on the other hand can be used for other things, > memory variants for caching, and persistent variants for > instance as an alternative nfs cluster handler for instance > (Cluster handler can already use different DB as Bertrand > mentioned on today eZ Conference talk, and the tables have a > simple key / value structure). > > > Ignore, mixed with ezdbfile_data, ezdfsfile is more complex so will > probably not be possible in a pure KV, but maybe using any of the > hybrids (Cassandra? but probably issue with it's > eventually consistence nature though). > > Nope, ezdfsfile table has the exact same structure as the ezdbfile one. > So a key/pair based cache would work here. We just have a few sync > issues that /have/ to be considered (TTL of items, expiry delay, etc).
Are you suggesting to use a key/pair for file metadata, or the reverse (keeping file metadata in a db and file data "chunks" in the kv)? Would the second solution be completely crazy (ie. no advantages in speed / simplicity of setup / other domains) or not? > There is an 'oops' from me here though, I have to confess: I probably > read the initial email too late at night (okay, 21:03. I was drunk, I > guess), and checked too quickly what KV Stores was exactly. But in any > case, it has triggered an interesting discussion about both topics :-) > > -- > Bertrand > -- Sdk-public mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ez.no/mailman/listinfo/sdk-public
