Re: [Duplicity-talk] backend query_info question

[Michael Terry]

Yeah, query_info is newer than the get/put calls and was done in a way
to allow individual backends to provide optimized ways of asking.

So if a backend can query multiple files at the same cost as one file,
it should implement  _query_list_info.  Otherwise, it should implement
the simpler _query_file_info.

A backend shouldn't reimplement query_info itself.

-mt

On 29 December 2011 19:43, Ken Bass <address@hidden> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am writing a backend (for the idrive/ibackup online storage) and am
> confused about the query_info().
>
> Is a backend supposed to (optionally) provide query_info, or
> _query_list_info or _query_file_info? It is rather confusing as to which is
> really supposed to be provided and I wasn't sure what the leading underscore
> was for.
>
> Initially I was just thinking of providing my own query_info, which is
> consistent with implementing other calls such as get, put, delete,  but then
> when I looked at some other backend code, I noticed _boto, couldfiles, gio,
> local and u1 all go the _query_file_info route. No one appears to be simply
> implementing the query_info themselves.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Duplicity-talk mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/duplicity-talk