On Monday 03 March 2008 17:43, bbackde at googlemail.com wrote: > Try perst. Seagull already made good experiences with the perst > performance, as I did in Frost. > He works on the Java port of fms. As far as I know there is already > some kind of trust system inside > the fms code? So lets start using the Java port code and maybe separate it.
Perst sounds good but has whole-database-level locking. That's bad, we probably won't use it for the datastore for that reason. > > 2008/3/3 Julien Cornuwel <batosai at batosai.net>: > > Hi, > > > > > > I've been thinking about the discussion initiated by bback (FMS Java > > design) and wondered if I shouldn't put my actual project on standby and > > start working on a WoT plugin. > > > > It seems to me that a WoT plugin would be more usefull than a > > filesharing tool... And of course, my first project would benefit of the > > WoT. > > > > So, unless someone with more experience volunteers for it, I think I'll > > start working on it. > > > > About the implementation, I think a relational database would be faster > > for trust calculation. I see a solution based only on the filesystem but > > it will use *a lot* of disk space to ensure decent performances. > > > > If I use a relational database, my preference goes to derby, which has > > to be loaded by the node itself. On my own machine, I load it in > > wrapper.conf. We'll have to find a more elegant solution... > > > > > > Your thoughts ? -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/tech/attachments/20080303/2b5dd18f/attachment.pgp>
