[tahoe-dev] barriers to using tahoe
imhavoc at gmail.com
Sat Feb 6 05:27:14 UTC 2010
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 9:53 PM, Zooko O'Whielacronx <zookog at gmail.com>wrote:
> Yeah it might turn out that $FILE_MANAGER <-> Tahoe-LAFS is much
> better performing and has nicer behaviour and better features and is
> easier to implement than $FILE_MANAGER <-> $FS_INTERFACE <->
> Tahoe-LAFS. (Where FS_INTERFACE is something like FUSE, FTP, SFTP,
> WebDAV, ...)
> I like $FILE_MANAGER <-> $FS_INTERFACE <-> Tahoe-LAFS because:
$FILE_MANAGER_X <-> $FS_INTERFACE <-> Tahoe-LAFS
$FILE_MANAGER_Y <-> $FS_INTERFACE <-> Tahoe-LAFS
$FILE_MANAGER_Z <-> $FS_INTERFACE <-> Tahoe-LAFS
Can all be accomplished with a single $FS_INTERFACE (or a small set of
$FS_INTERFACEs). I'll take maintaining a single piece of code over
maintaining many, and leaving the ugly corpses of orphaned $FILE_MANAGER
stubs lying around the landscape.
Directly supporting the file manager would lead to some, measurable better
performance, but the cost of doing so is huge in comparison.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the tahoe-dev