11 Dec
2003
11 Dec
'03
7:33 p.m.
Lukas Renggli wrote:
Hi Maurice,
I would recommend the Image Storage too. It's much faster.
SIXX is an option if you want to set up a fresh image and keep
the old contents. It stores the whole document tree in one file
named root.xml.
Btw, the Squeak version of SmallWiki doesn't
seem to store the wiki
pages in the same manner that you describe in your paper. The SIXX
storage seems to use a single XML doc, and the Image storage as a
standard (large) image and changeset. Which would you recommend?
in VisualWorks - the environment where SmallWiki had been developed - I
suggest to use the image-storage. It is much faster, the resulting files
are smaller and in my opinion it is also more secure. However I don't
know about the Squeak port, you have to ask the porters in the
mailing-list about their suggestions. What I actually think, that it would be nice to have a
reference-stream
or an image-slice storage in Squeak. I've used this mechanisms in some
of my web-development and it worked very well. I don't know if it scales
well, but it should be worth trying ...
Image Slices could be a nice alternative. But what is a
reference-stream? Any pointers?
I would like to see a Magma Storage. Magma is an objectoriented
Database written in and for Squeak. It can also be accessed
'in-image', so you don't have to set up a second Image as Server.
And it would be possible that only differences will be stored.
SIXX and the Image Storage store the whole tree again even when
you change just one character somewhere. Maybe somebody has the
time to write it :)
Regards
Chris Burkert
--
http://www.chrisburkert.de/