Sergiu Dumitriu wrote: > Vincent Massol wrote: >> On Mar 3, 2008, at 5:34 PM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote: >>> 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. +1
>>> Artem, do you think you can help, as this is something related to what >>> you've been working on? Yes. I think i can help. Attachment archive store is similar to old document archive store. But i didn't touch it. >> 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? :) > > It should be simpler, as attachments are just binary blobs, while the > XML history is much too fragile. I think too. -- Artem Melentyev _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
