On 6/20/2011 2:19 AM, Julian Leviston wrote:
On 20/06/2011, at 6:33 PM, BGB wrote:
I am not certain I follow how this would get rid of file-systems though...
I am not aware of any good alternative to the filesystem which is generally
better than the filesystem (can effectively manage huge numbers of files and
multiple TB of disk space, can effectively multiplex between a large number of
apps, and still is accessible to mere humans, ...).
Really? So you don't like the idea of an application managing its own content?
Effectively saying "hey, let's store our data with our code"... which is the
encapsulation pattern of OOP isn't it?
I missed wherever this was mentioned...
but, no, this is not generally ideal either IMO.
if an image-based strategy, it is my personal belief that these are
unlikely to (in themselves) be a general-purpose workable strategy (if
contrasted with a file-based, or file-backed strategy).
databases are sort of a compromise IMO, as then one can store their data
in a database, and fetch it back out. IMO, this is better with
hierarchical (registry-like databases) though, as IMO most generic
data-storage tasks are a poor match for an RDBMS (since it is generally
a pain to put data into or get it out of an RDBMS), but an HDB usually
matches a little more closely with application data-storage tasks IME.
in the case of my BGBScript language, the HDB actually forms a fairly
important part of the underlying structure of the VM.
but, a database is still stored as files...
I guess XML is also possible/popular, but I am not aware of any
particularly scalable way to access/query/... lots of XML-based data
(and a DB which quickly bogs down is not exactly ideal...).
also, by itself, XML isn't terribly easy to work with either...
hmm... S-Expression database?...
sort of like a hybrid between a database and a persistent store.
or such...
_______________________________________________
fonc mailing list
fonc@vpri.org
http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
