Re: Why not move Apt to a relational database
On Sat, Jun 09, 2007 at 02:52:04AM +0000, Oleg Verych wrote:
> > Based on a relational database it will run faster,
> First reason is "faster". What if i'll say: based on tmpfs and
> directory/file structure it will run even faster?
tmpfs is not faster than a real disk. You need the memory anyway and the
data on a real disk should be in the cache anyway if possible.
> > so that if the database is stored on another computer and first
> > computer has a hardware failure, the data from the backup can be used
> > to completely restore the computer to its status again.
> clients on failed machine: scp, curl, lftp, whatever to transfer a file
Most db formats are not transfer formats and are incompatible between
different versions and architectures. You need to dump them for such
sort of backup.
> > It should be a relational database that contains checksums of the
> > compressed and uncompressed state of files that will be installed.
prelink changes this value.
> > So
> > that if there is a problem with the computer and something is
> > segfaulting, every file on the computer can be checked against this
> > information, including freshly downloaded files, so that they can find
> > out if any of them are corrupt and need to be replaced.
The database is much more written to. Why do you think is it less likely
that this file is corrupted?
... The prejudices people feel about each other disappear when they get
to know each other.
-- Kirk, "Elaan of Troyius", stardate 4372.5