On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 12:22 PM, Roger Binns <rog...@rogerbinns.com> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 05/03/12 23:41, Max Vlasov wrote: > > One of the recent thought I had was implementing time machine vfs. So > > on the developer level he opens the db either in general mode or > > history (read-only) mode providing the date (or version) for working > > with the db as it was in the past. > > I don't see why a VFS has to be used. Surely the backup API is a far > better solution for this? > > Only the app knows where the logical boundaries are during database change > and use. This could be as simple as one transaction, or it could be a > group of transactions. You would want those history points to be well > chosen. > > Roger, I don't see a problem here. Any vfs can be used only by applications/developer knowing what for this vfs was created. So if this vfs advertise itself as allowing any "out of transaction" temporary restoration then any developer that sees that his internal logic is compatible with it will be able to use it. As for real world examples, I admit they can be very specific, but generally it's like adding time domain without changing the schema. Imagine some note-taking application. Virtually the developer will only need to add "Time-machine feature (requires more space)" in the "new..." dialog and if a file of such kind is opened, enable a menu item "Go to the date (read-only)..." with only dozens of additional lines of code on his side. Max _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
