Hi, On 8/16/06, Nicolas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Are you OK with those two updates to the core?
Can you send the patches you're proposing?
About the format used for restore: there is only small overhead since all files are zipped. Please keep in mind that the backup tool is only a first version and we might change it afterwards. For this first version, my priority was to have a readable and time standing format. From those point of view, the sysView is good.
I think Stefan's point about the system view overhead is related to 1) the inherent overhead in the XML encoding, 2) the base64-encoding of binaries, and 3) the hierarchical view of the content. 1 and 2 are pretty well handled by zip compression, but 3 requires the backup tool to walk the tree hierarchy (in comparison to just linearly dumping all the node states) when doing the backup. Using the system view has its benefits and drawbacks, and although I wouldn't originally have used it for the backup tool, I think Nicolas has a good case for going with the system view, at least for a first version of the backup tool. The hard part in that decision is figuring out the way to do the restore... BR, Jukka Zitting -- Yukatan - http://yukatan.fi/ - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Software craftsmanship, JCR consulting, and Java development
