Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2001 10:37:44 -0800 From: Robert Clark <res03db2@gte.net> To: Wes Peters <wes@softweyr.com> Cc: Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org>, Randell Jesup <rjesup@wgate.com>, Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>, Matt Dillon <dillon@earth.backplane.com>, Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net>, josb@cncdsl.com, chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: DJBDNS vs. BIND Message-ID: <20010306103744.D45802@darkstar.gte.net> In-Reply-To: <3AA4A110.5245FCD4@softweyr.com>; from wes@softweyr.com on Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 01:34:24AM -0700 References: <200102200122.SAA04466@usr05.primenet.com> <ybupugd2u4n.fsf@jesup.eng.tvol.net.jesup.eng.tvol.net> <3A934507.A0645CF3@softweyr.com> <ybug0gr3hsc.fsf@jesup.eng.tvol.net.jesup.eng.tvol.net> <15012.11507.801736.502035@guru.mired.org> <3AA4A110.5245FCD4@softweyr.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Wes, Have you seen any intelligent discussion of the whole concept of whether to keep config info in flat files, or to use a bindery/database? (Something I could go read up on.) I often wonder if a standardized api for storing and retreiving config info would be a benefit to *BSD. This whole subject seems like an unimaginably big can o worms. Even the staunchest advocates of the bindery/ registry don't get it completely right. (as far as I've seen anyway.) Thanks, [RC] On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 01:34:24AM -0700, Wes Peters wrote: > Mike Meyer wrote: > > > > Randell Jesup <rjesup@wgate.com> types: > > > Moved from -arch to -chat. > > > Wes Peters <wes@softweyr.com> writes: > > > >We in the unix world have a well-founded aversion to storing configuration > > > >information in binary data stores that can't be accessed via ed(1) when > > > >the system is in single-user mode. If we wanted to stuff all the system > > > >configuration into such a black hole, we could've done it with DBM data- > > > >bases more than a decade ago, quite easily. > > > > Oddly enough, this exact suggestion - stuff all the configuration > > information in a DBM - came up on a private list I'm no not long > > ago. The suggestion came from someone very sharp, the goal being to > > focus more talent on making the DBM fast. The problem Wes mentioned > > prett much killed it at that point. > > > > > As someone said, vipw is a good counterexample. > > > The above schemes do allow you to use ED (if you like) to edit > > > configuration files. In one case it's totally free (even cp will work), in > > > the other you have to use some sort of vipw thing to invoke the editor and > > > make sure that the file is notified as changed (or integrate with the > > > editor in some automatic or semi-automatic way). > > > > The critical issue isn't being able to use ed per se, it's working in > > single user mode, with no file systems mounted and no daemons > > running. How do your schemes deal with that requirement? > > Text-to-dbm converters still work fine in single user mode, as long as > they're robust to handle not having a daemon to talk to. I even have one > application that rips configuration information out of a PgSQL database > and stuff it into a DBM database, on system startup and whenever the PgSQL > table gets modified. > > Ick. > > -- > "Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?" > > Wes Peters Softweyr LLC > wes@softweyr.com http://softweyr.com/ > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010306103744.D45802>