12 Mar
2009
12 Mar
'09
10:12 a.m.
Sebastian Nowicki wrote:
On 12/03/2009, at 7:18 PM, Xavier wrote:
Otherwise, go go sqlite :)
Wasn't there a (set of) patch(es) for a "packed" format for the databases (tar-like, iirc)? From what I remember there was a performance improvement.
There was talk about moving to a tar based back-end but I don't remember patches. There was some patches for an sqlite backend but given we already need libarchive to extract the packages, a tar based backend makes more sense to me.
Allan
tar backend is optimal with read-only (== sync) databases, but I am not sure it would work with local database. See also: http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/8586 And Dan has a "backend" branch which may make the first steps. Bye