RE: [Evolution] Filing system

["Ray Lee" <ray madrabbit org>]

> I'll let others do the flaming, but well, an indexed flat file isn't
> really any performance problem at all

No disagreement here. An indexed flat file should actually be noticeably
faster than a full-fledged database.

> (and you can even repair it with vi!).

I have to point out that this fails the "Simple enough for my mother to
use" litmus test. It should never get to a state where it needs to be
repaired in the first place. What's odd is that I've heard this argument
from several different people now. Have you really needed to hand-edit
your mbox to fix it?

> What we have IS a database, it just doesn't look like one.
> (and no silly arguments about what constitutes a database and
> what doesn't).

Okay, I'll give a not silly argument. Most people consider databases to
have the nice property of having internal referential integrity, in that
the index and the items being indexed are always in sync. People also tend
to trust their databases to be less fragile than a flat file. They also
have the nice property of being able to attribute new data to old, without
the other users of the database noticing the attributed fields. And
finally, they have the *very* nice property of not being accessible except
via the exported database APIs. I'll leave out mentioning all the other
nice features, such as locking for multiuser access, etc., as I'm sure you
can call them to mind yourselves.

I'll mention again what I mentioned before: I have no desire to bring up
an argument for a database-backed message store right now, as it's not a
productive argument for getting version 1.0 of Evolution out the door. But
do please keep in mind that some of us would like to use a db for
messages. But, as long as the message-store interface is sufficiently well
designed, this is a conversation we can have later.

Ray Lee / ray madrabbit org ~ rblee impulse net