Re: FilesystemStore broken???

[Pier Fumagalli]

So, at the end of the day, who is ALSO using the persistent store? Only the cache? I'm getting lost in components, my greps are not powerful enough (anymore) :-(

        Pier

On 20 Oct 2004, at 06:55, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:

The cache is an own component (called Cache) which has currently one
default implementation that uses a Store (component). Now I think for
such use cases a different Cache implementation is better. This
implementation could directly "cache" the data without going via
a store.

Carsten

-----Original Message-----
From: Pier Fumagalli [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2004 2:26 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: FilesystemStore broken???

On 20 Oct 2004, at 01:01, Vadim Gritsenko wrote:

Pier Fumagalli wrote:

After a brief suggestion from Carsten, given that I already have a
B-Tree indexing filesystem under my live application (ReiserFS) I
wanted to switch the persistent store to be the

FilesystemStore, and

ignore all those JISP/JCACHE/EHCACHE/blablabla stuff...
Looking at my cocoon.xconf, I see this:
WARNING: FilesystemStore and JispStore are broken.

FilesystemStore:

  It was consistently not working (IIRC) since 2.1 - which has
  significantly larger keys - and this means, store will create
  files with significantly larger file names - which do not fit
  into most file systems.

[...]

You can try and improve FilesystemStore. May be use some

hash for the

file name?

Yeah... Now that I know what I have to look at, I can give it
a shot...
I don't know the filename length on RaiserFS, but that's what
I want to use :-P

Frankly, having a B-Tree index on top of another B-Tree index
seems kinda of a waste, that's why I don't want to use all
those caching things anymore... They're soooo Windows FAT-32!!! :-P

        Pier

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature