youshi10 at u.washington.edu
Mon May 14 05:40:04 UTC 2007
Duane Whitty wrote:
> Sounds like you're involved in a cool project. What kind of
> community collaboration/involvement would be helpful to you?
> Once, a long, long time ago, I wrote quite a bit of bdb 1.85
> code. At that time it WAS the current version :) I might
> actually remember a bit if I start working with it again.
> But what would be most useful to you?
> And if I may ask about a design decision: Why did you choose
> a hash structure? Perhaps if you have time you could give
> a little more info but whatever fits your schedule.
> Good luck on your project.
I actually chose hash structure at the time because I thought it was
appropriate for the size of the ports tree and the number of files that
may need to be used. Plus, Kris suggested that :). Given the way that
I've seen how things are used, this would be great for searching for who
added what file, finding cyclic dependencies easily, maintaining
uniqueness, etc, many common issues with the current ruby scripts.
Also, the other available BDB options like btrees seem inefficient,
over the long run :(..
Do you know of any simple APIs that can quickly dump fields in use with
BDB .db files? I have a hunch given the Ruby that I've taken a look at
with Portupgrade that something very inefficient's in play, but I want
to test my assumption first before jumping to conclusions.
Thank you very much for the help :)!
More information about the freebsd-hackers