Re: [Gzz-commits] manuscripts/storm article.rst

[hemppah]

Lainaus Benja Fallenstein <address@hidden>:

> Hermanni Hyytiälä wrote:
> >  Storm has been partially implemented as a part of the Gzz project [ref],
> 
> > -which uses it exclusively for all disk storage. On top of Storm,
> > +which uses Storm exclusively for all disk storage. On top of Storm,
> 
> Hum, why do you want to repeat the name?

There has been some mistake; I haven't written it again/twice etc. Something 
with editor or CVS, I assume ;).

> 
> > -Block storage makes it easy to replicate data between systems.
> > +1) Storm's block storage makes it easy to replicate data between
> systems.
> 
> Btw, please read about the reStructuredText syntax at
> http://docutils.sourceforge.net/rst.html

Yes, sorry for 'broking' reST ;). I just wanted to enumerate/itemize Storm 
benefits; This was a 'concrete proposal'-- what do you think, should we 
enumerate/itemize benefits like this or tell benefits 'implicity' in text ?

> 
> You have to indent when you enumerate, like this:
> 
> 1) bla bla bla bla bla
>     bla bla bla bla bla
>     bla bla bla.

Yes, look above ;).

> 
> >  Different versions of the same document can easily coexist at this
> level,
> > +stored in different blocks. 
> > +[Previous sentence doesn't parse to me (what level ?) :( -Hermanni]
> 
> The block level... you can have two blocks that contain two alternative 
> versions of a document, without getting a naming conflict.

Could you include this in text ?

> 
> > +To replicate all data from computer A
> >  on computer B, it suffices to copy all blocks from A to B that B
> >  does not already store.
> > +[Example of Lotus Notes' replication conficts ? -Hermanni]
> 
> Yes, please! :)

I'll write about that.

> >      get(id) -> block
> >      add(block)
> >      delete(block)
>  >
> > +[analogy to regular Hash Table/DHT ? -Hermanni]
> 
> I don't see that-- we are not assigning values to keys, the systems 
> assigns the keys...

But the *interface* is somewhat similar. But, perhaps this is not relevent ;).

> 
> > +(Footnote:However, we have not put a network implementation into regular
> use
> >  yet and thus can only describe our design, not report on
> > -implementation experience.
> > +implementation experience.)
> 
> Hm, I think we should not move that into a footnote: It very much seems 
> important enough to go into the main text...

Ok.

> 
> > +Since the same namespace [mention urn-5 ? -Hermanni] is used for local
> data and data
> 
> No, this is talking about the block level, where the ids are 
> cryptographic hashes.

Ok. Then we should tell clearly what we mean by 'namespace' ?

-Hermanni




-------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/