On Mar 12, 2008, at 12:21 AM, Samuel Klein wrote: > That works for a small group tweaking a large database.
How is that not appropriate for each user's personal dictionary? > For any (initial) corpus, at some point user modifications are > significant. Even 500 words out of, say, fifty thousand is not very significant when it comes to making the choice about backend implementation. > Consider many users revising a small database. Do they have to share > updated corpora and "recent modifications" separately, as database and > overlay files? That strikes me as fairly much optimal, yes. Is there a problem with it? > For speed, why not have a constant database that is checked on reads, > and perform slower queries on "edit" / "update cached term" / "update > all"? I don't know what this paragraph means. -- Ivan Krstić <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | http://radian.org _______________________________________________ Sugar mailing list [email protected] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
