Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
AW: [smila-dev] BinaryStorage service concept

Hi,

I've just posted my comments on http://wiki.eclipse.org/Talk:SMILA/Component_Requirements/Record_Binary_Storage_Requirements

Regards
Igor


> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: smila-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:smila-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] Im
> Auftrag von Juergen.Schumacher@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Gesendet: Montag, 20. Oktober 2008 14:32
> An: smila-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Betreff: RE: [smila-dev] BinaryStorage service concept
> 
> Hi,
> 
> there are at least two more people who think that using "record" and
> "attachment" in the BinStorage API names is not appropriate, see the
> "Discussion" page of the requirements page [1], so now there are three
> (at least ;-).
> 
> Maybe Igor can say if these names really are a hard part of the
> requirements?
> 
> Yours,
> Juergen.
> 
> [1]
> http://wiki.eclipse.org/Talk:SMILA/Component_Requirements/Record_Binary_Stor
> age_Requirements
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: smila-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:smila-dev-
> > bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Marius Cimpean
> > Sent: Monday, October 20, 2008 1:33 PM
> > To: Smila project developer mailing list
> > Subject: Re: [smila-dev] BinaryStorage service concept
> >
> > Hi Dmitry
> >
> > the API re-naming is based on the Binarystorage requirements :
> > http://wiki.eclipse.org/SMILA/Component_Requirements/Record_Binary_Stor
> > age_Requirements
> >
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Marius
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Dmitry Hazin" <dhazin@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > To: "Smila project developer mailing list" <smila-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Monday, October 20, 2008 2:23 PM
> > Subject: Re: [smila-dev] BinaryStorage service concept
> >
> >
> > Minor note regarding Binary Storage Service API: should it expose
> > knowledge about Records and Attachments?
> > Probably it's worth to use just something generic like getObject,
> > saveObject etc?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Dmitry
> >
> > Marius Cimpean wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > The Binary storage concept page is available -  please have a look
> > and
> > > submit your remarks. We can discuss the binary storage based on this
> > page
> > >
> > > http://wiki.eclipse.org/SMILA/Project_Concepts/Binary_Storage
> > >
> > > Best Regards,
> > > Marius
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Thomas Menzel" <tmenzel@xxxxxxx>
> > > To: "Smila project developer mailing list" <smila-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Sent: Monday, October 13, 2008 1:16 PM
> > > Subject: RE: [smila-dev] Re: Problems with BinStorage
> > >
> > >
> > > hi jürgen,
> > >
> > > very nice, if u had not written this, i would have. thx
> > >
> > > from what I understood, VFS supports already diff. storage
> > implementations
> > > for diff. *mountpoints*. so, with VFS it's already possible to have a
> > DB,
> > > distributed FS, local FS at the same time, albeit in diff.
> > namespaces.
> > >
> > > and yes, I think it is not part of the client to say directly, I want
> > DB
> > > storage or local, it just would have to know the NS it is config'ed
> > for
> > > and hence all this moves into the config/admin realm. he then has to
> > > decide what is best in what situation.
> > >
> > > also: having followed the discussion so far, I think it is OK to say
> > that
> > > at this time it makes more sense to write the BinStorage API such
> > that it
> > > fits for the current use case, which is that the client doesn't need
> > > control of folders (or am I wrong here?).
> > >
> > > an interface for FS-like distributed storage we can add later IMO.
> > and I
> > > also have come to think that this could actually go into a new API
> > that is
> > > different or just complementary to the BinStorage API.
> > >
> > > Kind regards
> > > Thomas Menzel @ brox IT-Solutions GmbH
> > >
> > >
> > > PS: should we open a bug for this discussion as well? or do u prefer
> > > keeping this on the dev list?
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: smila-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:smila-dev-
> > bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> > > On Behalf Of Juergen.Schumacher@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Sent: Montag, 13. Oktober 2008 12:02
> > > To: smila-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Subject: RE: [smila-dev] Re: Problems with BinStorage
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > It's not really clear to me, what this discussion is about currently
> > (API?
> > > backend?), so I'll try to sum up my point of view on the complete
> > package,
> > > and hopefully we'll get some answers from it (-;
> > >
> > > The purpose of BinStorage is to store millions (or billions) of
> > (possibly
> > > large) binary objects and make them available to a relatively large
> > number
> > > of record processors running distributed in a "cluster" of computers.
> > > Currently I do not know what kind of backend might be the best to
> > match
> > > these requirements, I rather think that it should be exchangeable in
> > order
> > > to be able to match different requirements: In one application it
> > could be
> > > simply a shared file system, because performance is sufficient and
> > > administration is easy, in other applications distributed file
> > systems
> > > might be necessary, or some database technology or whatever. I don't
> > think
> > > that we can decide this now for good. Thus the API must be as generic
> > as
> > > possible to be implementable on any kind of backend.
> > > And the details of the storage backend must not be of relevance to a
> > > client: One blackboard just writes the attachments of a record to bin
> > > storage, another one retrieves it again. They should not have to care
> > > about where to put the objects in a hierarchy for good performance,
> > it's
> > > the task of BinStorage to create such hierarchies internally if a
> > flat
> > > storage is not sufficient.
> > >
> > > On the other side, I'm not against having a BinStorage API that
> > enables
> > > different kinds of clients to use different "namespaces" in
> > BinStorage to
> > > separate their data. These namespaces could be hierarchical: a "file
> > > system" metaphor behind the API might be helpful for developers using
> > > BinStorage, because most users are accustomed to it, even if the
> > actual
> > > storage has nothing to with a file system.  On the other hand this
> > might
> > > enable the configurator/administrator of BinStorage to distribute
> > > partitions of data to different storage mediums (just dreaming now ;-
> > ) for
> > > better performance. But BinStorage must not rely only on structures
> > > provided by the clients, but must organize the stored data for
> > optimal
> > > performance even if a client does not provide any structure at all.
> > >
> > > Hopefully this has not increased the confusion even more (-;
> > >
> > > Yours,
> > > Juergen.
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > smila-dev mailing list
> > > smila-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/smila-dev
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > smila-dev mailing list
> > > smila-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/smila-dev
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > smila-dev mailing list
> > > smila-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/smila-dev
> > _______________________________________________
> > smila-dev mailing list
> > smila-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/smila-dev
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > smila-dev mailing list
> > smila-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/smila-dev
> _______________________________________________
> smila-dev mailing list
> smila-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/smila-dev


Back to the top