Re: SQL DB instead of index.txt

2002-01-28 Thread Bear Giles
(Slightly OT, but it is important to anyone looking at storing these objects in a relational database.) > with postgres 7.1 the 8k limit is gone anyway. Yes and no. What 7.1 added - and why I don't support older versions - is TOAST support that tells the database server that it's okay to move t

Re: SQL DB instead of index.txt

2002-01-28 Thread Keary Suska
on 1/28/02 9:10 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] purportedly said: >> why not use an existing database abstraction layer such as libdbi or ODBC? > > Too abstract - queries are done with SQL statements. That's not a > problem with a RDBMS backend, but requires a lot of extra code with > everything else. E

Re: SQL DB instead of index.txt

2002-01-28 Thread David Lang
with postgres 7.1 the 8k limit is gone anyway. On Sun, 27 Jan 2002, Bear Giles wrote: > Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 19:23:55 -0700 (MST) > From: Bear Giles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: SQL DB instead of index.txt &g

Re: SQL DB instead of index.txt

2002-01-28 Thread Bear Giles
> > I can think of multiple > > common storage formats: text files, DBM files, LDAP, RDBMS. > > why not use an existing database abstraction layer such as libdbi or ODBC? Too abstract - queries are done with SQL statements. That's not a problem with a RDBMS backend, but requires a lot of extra

Re: SQL DB instead of index.txt

2002-01-28 Thread Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker
From: Marko Asplund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> aspa> On Sun, 27 Jan 2002, Bear Giles wrote: aspa> aspa> > ... aspa> > Long term, it would be best to create an abstraction layer that aspa> > would allow any backend to be used. I can think of multiple aspa> > common storage formats: text files, DBM file

Re: SQL DB instead of index.txt

2002-01-28 Thread Marko Asplund
On Sun, 27 Jan 2002, Bear Giles wrote: > ... > Long term, it would be best to create an abstraction layer that > would allow any backend to be used. I can think of multiple > common storage formats: text files, DBM files, LDAP, RDBMS. But > that's definitely not a 0.9.7 task! why not use an ex

Re: SQL DB instead of index.txt

2002-01-27 Thread Bear Giles
> A simple question, but not a least: > instead of using the index.txt file as database of registered certificates, > could it be possible to use a SQL database "e.g. PostgreSQL" as the > engine version of openssl can with HSM "e.g. nCipher" My PKIX extensions to PostgreSQL 7.1.x provide "native"

Re: SQL DB instead of index.txt

2002-01-27 Thread Dr S N Henson
Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote: > > From: Averroes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > a.averroes> A simple question, but not a least: > a.averroes> instead of using the index.txt file as database of > a.averroes> registered certificates, could it be possible to use a SQL > a.averroes> database "e.g. P

Re: SQL DB instead of index.txt

2002-01-27 Thread Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker
From: Averroes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a.averroes> A simple question, but not a least: a.averroes> instead of using the index.txt file as database of a.averroes> registered certificates, could it be possible to use a SQL a.averroes> database "e.g. PostgreSQL" as the engine version of a.averroes> open

SQL DB instead of index.txt

2002-01-27 Thread Averroes
Hi list, I am not C coder! A simple question, but not a least: instead of using the index.txt file as database of registered certificates, could it be possible to use a SQL database "e.g. PostgreSQL" as the engine version of openssl can with HSM "e.g. nCipher" Regards -- # .- ...- . .-. .-. -