On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 09:32:44PM +0100, Richard Huxton wrote:
> Dave Page wrote:
> >Richard Huxton wrote:
> >>Magnus Hagander wrote:
> >>>>>>It's been on my list to rewrite the whole archive system for a while
> >>>>>>for various reasons. There is quite a bit of crossover with the patch
> >>>>>>tracker I proposed so I was hoping to look at both together.
> >>>>>Let me know when you start on that...
> >>>Same here - I've done something similar (off mhonarc files and in much
> >>>smaller scale) before, and I'm definitely interested in helping out.
> >>Is everyone aware of this system that runs on a well-known open-source
> >> http://www.archiveopteryx.org/
> >>I've used it in a small way, and while I don't claim to have looked at
> >>it in detail it seems to pretty much do what it claims to.
> >Yeah, I looked at it in the past. The database storage part is actually
> >pretty simple - it's the web front end that's going to take more effort,
> >and thats what that product doesn't do (or if it does, it's a secondary
> >function they don't shout about).
> It's supposed to have something in the latest version, I think. I used
> it as backing store for a small workflow app, so I've got some simple
> views/functions I added and PHP code (cake-php framework) for displaying
> messages if it'll be of any use.
> My one concern with the schema was that there didn't seem to be a way to
> partition archives (e.g. by year) to make maintenance a little simpler
> for large databases.
Luckily I happen to know of a database that would make that transparent
to the app...
But I tend to agree with Dave; the storage part is pretty easy. If we've
still got to write our own front-end ISTM it'd be better to just make it
exactly what we want...
Jim Nasby [EMAIL PROTECTED]
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?