[Opensim-dev] Always mutable assets in OpenSim -- does it make sense?

[Frisby, Adam]

This isn't true.

Updating on one server is fast, sure.

But you have the problem of caching - when fetching from the cache you always want the latest version, so updates need to purge every cache of the original version too.

That's why LL (and many others) assign new indexes for each revision.

Regards,

Adam

> -----Original Message-----
> From: opensim-dev-bounces at lists.berlios.de [mailto:opensim-dev-
> bounces at lists.berlios.de] On Behalf Of Melanie
> Sent: Sunday, 14 December 2008 2:59 PM
> To: opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
> Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] Always mutable assets in OpenSim -- does it
> make sense?
>
> At 50 million assets, update is significantly faster than insert.
>
> It is true, however, that a delete interface would accomplish this
> task as well, leaving no dead assets and only one dead asset in the
> case of a crash.
>
> Melanie
>
>
> Sean Dague wrote:
> > Melanie wrote:
> >> This is not about mutable notecards. This is about one particular
> >> case, attachment editing, and the desire to avoid thousands of dead
> >> assets being created by a single long attachment editing session,
> >> while at the same time not wanting to lose the work people have done
> >> in a crash.
> >> I never intended to have this mutate into a discussion on changing
> >> the basic paradigm of immutable assets, but just to get one
> >> exception to that rule in one case where it is safe to do so and
> >> provides the most elegant solution for an otherwise tricky issue.
> >>
> >> I am very unhappy that this got derailed into a discussion about
> >> making all assets mutable. This is not what i intended.
> >>
> >> I may be better off maintaining nice, clean, working attachment
> >> persistence as a private patch.
> >
> > Melanie,
> >
> > If this is just about dead assets why not just open up a delete
> > interface to the asset database?  A database update to a blob isn't
> > substantially faster than delete / insert.  That's what was done with
> > the osDynamicTexture calls so that we stopped filling up the caches
> with
> > long dead assets.
> >
> > I understand that updatable assets is a solution here, but it does
> open
> > up a can of worms.  If an interface is there for mutable assets
> someone
> > else will decide "well, it would make case X easier, so I'll use it
> > there" and not really understand that it's not going to do what they
> want.
> >
> > Another issue with updateable assets is that it would make sha1 uuids
> > impossible.  I'd hate to give that one up for future implementation.
> >
> >       -Sean
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> ---
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Opensim-dev mailing list
> > Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
> > https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-dev mailing list
> Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev