[Opensim-dev] Please do not revert fixes without careful comtemplation

[Frisby, Adam]

I have a CableBeach provider which does just this (and more!), I'm testing it at the moment for deployment onto OSGrid. It's a little more complicated since it's part of a distributed hash table, but yeah.

Adam

From: opensim-dev-bounces at lists.berlios.de [mailto:opensim-dev-bounces at lists.berlios.de] On Behalf Of Stefan Andersson
Sent: Monday, 16 February 2009 12:52 AM
To: opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de; Mike Mazur
Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] Please do not revert fixes without careful comtemplation

Coming in a bit from the side here,

we have, for some time, discussed to separate out the binary blog out of the metadata for an entirely different reason, namely to be able to weed out binary duplicates.

If there was a way for us to separate out the binary parts, into something like 'binaryassetId, hashData[256], binarydata' and then just have the asset table referencing that row, I think it would help a lot.

I realize it's a separate discussion, just chipping in my two cents.

Best regards,
Stefan Andersson
Tribal Media AB




________________________________
Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2009 17:49:22 +0200
From: tommi.s.e.laukkanen at gmail.com
To: mmazur at gmail.com
CC: opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] Please do not revert fixes without careful comtemplation
Hello,

On second though we could keep the current structure and expose all fields also through AssetBase properties. Then we could save / load the AssetBase with nhibernate as a single object and leave out the Metadata  property from NHibernate mapping. Does this sound good?

regards,
Tommi
On Sat, Feb 14, 2009 at 5:06 PM, Mike Mazur <mmazur at gmail.com<mailto:mmazur at gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi,

On Sat, Feb 14, 2009 at 4:05 PM, Tommi Laukkanen
<tommi.s.e.laukkanen at gmail.com<mailto:tommi.s.e.laukkanen at gmail.com>> wrote:
> I was talking with mikkopa and he suggested we should create two tables to
> cover AssetBase to solve this issue properly. Namely AssetMetadata for
> metadata information and AssetData for blobs to avoid situation where we end
> up accessing also the blob data just to read metadata.
I was hoping not to have to do that.

It should be straightforward to support the current
AssetBase/AssetMetadata composition in the existing OpenSim data
layers, but as sdague warned me earlier, by mapping multiple classes
to one table I was entering a world of pain. Seems that's exactly
what's happening with NHibernate.

The reason I introduced the AssetMetadata class is to supply metadata
information only for some requests that Cable Beach, the new asset
server, supports. Now I realize that this was probably a premature
optimization.

Instead of modifying the DB schema, we could have AssetBase inherit
from AssetMetadata, as I outlined before[1]. Alternatively, we could
get rid of AssetMetadata altogether and store everything in AssetBase
as before, splitting out the metadata sometime in the future when a
use case warrants it.

What do you think?

Thanks,
Mike


[1] https://lists.berlios.de/pipermail/opensim-dev/2009-February/004918.html

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://opensimulator.org/pipermail/opensim-dev/attachments/20090216/1700ba09/attachment-0001.html>