Re: New extension: chdb

hi Lorenzo, On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 4:05 PM, Lorenzo Castelli <lorenzo@hyves.nl> wrote: > On Fri, 2010-06-04 at 22:22 +0200, Pierre Joye wrote: >> Have you considered hidef too? Maybe the two can be merged into one extension? > > As far as I can see hidef is quite different design-wise. The main > design choice of chdb is the use of a memory-mapped file for storing the > database, which allows for constant time initial loading, on-demand page > loading, sharing across multiple processes and caching across process > recycling. > > I'm not sure about what kind of merging could be done. What would you > propose? Hidef idea is to make contants cost free, no runtime initialization. That's its primary goal. The constants are stored in a simple ini file, that's the difference with your extension. A backend based design would allow both a DB or whatever else we could imagine while having the benefits of hidef's primary goal. It will also avoids to have one extension per storage. Cheers, -- Pierre @pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org