> As usual, Josh makes good points. > > A text-based database is less convenient to query. I really don’t see why > storing the information in a database should be challenging. But I’m not > writing the TCL or C. > > I would feel more comfortable running sql queries to verify the snapshots > are being created accurately. > > If text-based storage moves the project forward more quickly do that for > now. That would be my advice. > > It is your call Umesh. >
At this stage, it's equal time and effort going either side. So I suggest to continue with the original approach UNLESS there's an additional advantage with the other. > And yes, you would need procedures to manipulate this stuff from Tcl as > you suggested above. And the existing code would need to be updated to only > remove ports when they are no longer referenced by any snapshot. > > > > And then again, I am sensing a confusion with the idea of snapshot with > Josh, like when he says "remove ports when they are no longer referenced by > any snapshot”. > > I think Josh is referring to 3NF normalization (third normal form). I > don’t think this use case warrants this complexity. I think it is fine for > two snapshot id’s to reference the same port+variant combination. When a > snapshot id is deleted, cascade delete. > I think we can pick up the deletion of a snapshot later. - Umesh
