On 08/06/2015 10:56 PM, Adam Hunt wrote: > Something that I've been wondering since then is the complexity > introduced by mutable files. In a few use cases that I've been thinking > about mutability is unnecessary and potentially even a liability. How > much complexity is introduced into Tahoe's design to allow for mutabile > files? If mutability was eliminated from an implementation of a system > based on Tahoe's design would the system become appreciably less complex?
That raises a question in my head: when mutable files are mutated, are the existing shares updated or are new shares created? And what happens to the servers holding shares that cannot be updated? I ask because the garbage collection in Tahoe is a point where I see a lot of room for improvement. (brief response/pointers are sufficient) Best, Lukas _______________________________________________ tahoe-dev mailing list [email protected] https://tahoe-lafs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tahoe-dev
