On Oct 11, 2018, at 12:26 AM, Darren Duncan <dar...@darrenduncan.net> wrote: > > On 2018-10-10 1:36 PM, Eric wrote: >> Too much overhead, how often must I clone ... > > This makes me think that it would be useful, if it doesn't already, for > Fossil to have something analogous to a database replication feature.
That’s pretty much what Fossil *is*: a replicated database. Most of it happens to be blockchain structured, rather than relational table structured, but much of the table-structured data is also synchronized between a clone and its parent. Fossil forum content is just more of the same of what Fossil already stores, so it syncs down to a clone just the same as anything else you’ve got stored in Fossil. The only differences between a Fossil repository clone and its parent are some local-only settings and security-sensitive information such as the user table. If you clone as a sufficiently privileged user, you can even pull down the user table. This is useful when replicating Fossil across multiple sites for backup and site fail-over purposes. The SQLite and Fossil project repos are currently replicated across 3 different hosts in this way. > A bit like a mailing list but that the sender and client are both instances > of Fossil. Fossil allows you to open your local repository in a browser and insert content into the forum locally, then sync the content up to the remote repository. That requires a user capability that had not been given to my user on the fossil-scm.org/forum instance, last I checked. I assume that no one else but drh can do this at the moment on that instance. However, I’ve done it on one of my own Fossil repositories, just now: https://tangentsoft.com/mysqlpp/forumpost/f8b7fc2ca9 _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
