Re: [Gnu-arch-users] New feature at the mirror + request for help

[Jan Hudec]

On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 02:01:28 -0500, James Blackwell wrote:
> > > No, I still don't have an arch browser yet. All of them seem to have an
> > > achilles heel -- they either require a revision library or require 
> > > building
> > > a cache. While I haven't tried anything that requires building a cache, I
> > > can tell you that building a library of all archives is basically already
> > > too big a job for SC.
> 
> [deleted quote that I was looking for something in php]
> > 
> > When it comes to the matter of ViewARCH, cache generation is optional.
> > Even if you don't execute gencache.py, rest of the stuffs are still 
> > available.
> How big is the cache? Is it as bad as having a revision library? back when
> there were about 60 archives, I tried generating a revision library of
> everything. Not only was this not possible (missing archives, older,
> corrupt libraries), but it took over 2 hours to run and took 40 gigabytes
> of space. These days I have over 160 archives.
> 
> I also believe that ViewARCH is written in python. That means I'd have to
> run it as a cgi, which in turn would require an exec. As such, I'm holding
> out for something written in php because I have a php module for apache.

A python module exists. It should be quite easy to add that. And,
really, it's probably faster in python even with the exec.

That is, I was able to find comparsion showing that perl is a hell lot
faster than php. But python is slower that php. I have not seen a direct
comparison between python and php. However, I believe that python is not
THAT slow as php.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Jan 'Bulb' Hudec 
<address@hidden>

signature.asc
Description: Digital signature