Vincent Massol wrote: > On Mar 3, 2008, at 5:34 PM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote: > >> Hi devs, >> >> As detailed in another mail >> (http://lists.xwiki.org/pipermail/devs/2008-February/005344.html), the >> current attachment archive mechanism is very inefficient. We should >> write a new one, which stores attachment versions as plain binary >> data, >> and see if the current core is pluggable enough to allow the old >> mechanism to be preserved as a plugin, and possibly define other >> storage >> mechanisms, like a filesystem based one. >> >> Artem, do you think you can help, as this is something related to what >> you've been working on? > > My only worry is that last time we changed the database format we > spent several months stabilizing it... since there were lots of > problems. I'm not even sure we've finished stabilizing it fully... > > So is there any chance that this would be simpler? :) > > Thanks > -Vincent >
It should be simpler, as attachments are just binary blobs, while the XML history is much too fragile. -- Sergiu Dumitriu http://purl.org/net/sergiu/ _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
