Re: Binary pkg cache (WAS: Re: Debian vs Red Hat??? I need info.)
On Thu, 25 May 2000, Craig Sanders wrote:
> hmmmm. i suppose the only other really viable way of doing that is for
> dpkg to construct a hashed db (LHS = filename, RHS = package name),
There are many sneaky techniques you can use. I prototyped a system that
would use about 32 bytes per file (including file path, averaged across a
wide sample), was mmapable and had good common-case lookup locality,
similar to what APT uses for packages.
It was kind of neat, it actually used less memory than the sum of the list
files, but not much less.
Performance was on par with the existing dpkg system and I think it used
something like a quarter the RAM.
Hard to say if it is actually workable though..