<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
Hey folks,<br>
<br>
On 03/12/2012 09:35 AM, Andrew Hecox wrote:<br>
<span style="white-space: pre;">> On 03/12/2012 10:17 AM, Bryn M.
Reeves wrote:</span><br>
<blockquote type="cite">On 03/12/2012 01:00 PM, Andrew Hecox wrote:<br>
>>>> tar archives provide a journal/manifest of the
names of files,<br>
>>>> and where they are. Because tar is a well known
file format,<br>
>>>> there are already language bindings in place for
everything<br>
>>>> anyone would want to do.<br>
<br>
Unfortunately this does not solve the problem; as I mentioned
before<br>
the tar structure should be considered an ABI. It is subject to
change<br>
and is not discoverable in a way that will support upcoming
changes in<br>
a robust way.<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
But, a manifest that just lists the file contents doesn't' provide
any benefit over what we already have. What I'm interested in is
what "upcoming changes" you envision. That should be driving the
need of a manifest. I.e., we don't need a manifest now, we only
need it when we have those changes and, thus, the manifest becomes
part of those changes, not a separate thing.<br>
<blockquote type="cite">> I'd guess to most consumers, the
logical layout & content is an API found through tar bindings
for whatever your specific languages are.<br>
<br>
For instance, sos will soon need to have the ability to collect
the<br>
same configuration file from multiple locations and to record this<br>
information in the archive. While it would be possible to search
all<br>
archives for all possible paths this is inefficient and prone to<br>
failure. For instance, if we change the set of command line
options<br>
used to run a program the path in the tarball will changes as
might<br>
the content present at that path.<br>
<br>
> what are these "same configuration file from multiple
locations" use-cases?<br>
<br>
> -Ah<br>
<br>
This also cannot address more complex manipulations of the data
than a<br>
simple "read this data from this path". In looking at the tools
that<br>
consume sos data there is huge overlap and commonality in the<br>
information that they retrieve and the processing that they carry
out.<br>
Reinventing this in each project that has overlapping requirements
is<br>
not maintainable long-term and will hinder sos's ability to adapt
to<br>
meet changing requirements (since there will be pressure to not
make<br>
changes that would affect downstream consumers).<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Here, too, what are these use-cases? I think that we need a fairly
high bar to do any processing beyond "read this data from this
path." I.e., nearly all analysis should happen server side.
Commonality can happen on the server-side analysis libraries. <br>
<br>
Also, I'm I also am interested in how opaque you are thinking the
report should be. The implication here is that it is completely
opaque and should only be accessed through an API. Is that the
thought? (If so, I have many reservations.)<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
Mike C.<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>