[tahoe-lafs-trac-stream] [tahoe-lafs] #393: mutable: implement MDMF
tahoe-lafs
trac at tahoe-lafs.org
Mon Feb 21 09:33:10 PST 2011
#393: mutable: implement MDMF
------------------------------+---------------------------------------------
Reporter: warner | Owner: kevan
Type: enhancement | Status: assigned
Priority: major | Milestone: 1.9.0
Component: code-mutable | Version: 1.0.0
Resolution: | Keywords: newcaps performance random-access privacy gsoc mdmf mutable backward-compatibility forward-compatibility review-needed
Launchpad Bug: |
------------------------------+---------------------------------------------
Comment (by warner):
I'm bringing this up-to-date for trunk and (finally!) reviewing it.
Amazing work! I'm building up a list of minor cleanups that can wait until
after we land it, but one item came up that I wanted to ask about.
The big new webapi method is a PUT/POST operation to a mutable file that
includes an {{{offset=X}}} argument, allowing you to modify the middle of
an existing mutable file. But it looks like negative offsets are used to
mean "do the old-style replace-the-whole-file behavior". Should we reserve
negative offsets for something more useful in the future (by having them
raise an error for now)? I'm thinking that it'd be nice to have an easy
API to append to a mutable file, and right now it seems like the only way
to accomplish that is to first do a {{{t=json}}} query to learn the size
of the file, then do a PUT with {{{offset=size}}}. I can imagine wanting
to express an append with {{{offset=-1}}} or {{{offset=append}}} or
something like that, and I don't want to teach webapi users that using
{{{offset=-X}}} means "replace", making it unsafe for us to reclaim that
portion of the argument space later.
thoughts?
--
Ticket URL: <http://tahoe-lafs.org/trac/tahoe-lafs/ticket/393#comment:70>
tahoe-lafs <http://tahoe-lafs.org>
secure decentralized storage
More information about the tahoe-lafs-trac-stream
mailing list