apr_dbd vs. direct sqlite (was Re: searchable revprops?)

"Ben Collins-Sussman" <sussman@red-bean.com> writes:

> On 5/15/07, C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato@collab.net> wrote:
>
> > That's a good observation, Ben. Let's not be guilty of rushing something
> > under-designed into the codebase, though.
>
> Totally agree. I meant, "here's a yummy feature someone could take
> the time to write a design spec for." :-) Whatever the design may
> be, I imagine that the implementation will be fairly easy, now that
> we've got SQL at our disposal.

Speaking of that, should we be using apr_dbd instead of sqlite
directly? If sqlite doesn't perform well enough for large
installations (as i suspect), this would make it easier to plugin
a replacement for all svn's SQL usage in one fell swoop.

As long as we only use sqlite in one place, it's not as much of
an issue, but if we think we're going to expand our usage, i
think it makes sense to think about this. Especially before 1.5
ships and it becomes too late. Or, hmm, i don't know, would
switching from direct sqlite to apr_dbd in some post-1.5 release
be a compatibility issue? Still better to think about it sooner
rather than later...

-- 
Eric Gillespie <*> epg@pretzelnet.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org