Subject: Re: Structured Storage [was: Re: Inline Images??? ]
From: Joaquín Cuenca Abela (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Fri Apr 20 2001 - 13:14:24 CDT
Hubert Figuiere wrote:
> On vendredi, avril 20, 2001, at 05:05 , Joaquin Cuenca Abela wrote:
> > On 20 Apr 2001 16:59:28 +0200, Hubert Figuiere wrote:
> >>> 2) TGZ - rebels!
> >>> 3) ZIP - OpenOffice
> >> Nope.
> > just for the record, can you (Dom or Hubert) explain what are the
> > problems with these aproachs?
> gzip is a one file compression. This means that you have to uncompress
> the whole file before using it.
Yes, but where is the problem?
Many people are already saving its files as .zabw, Dia also saves by
default his file compressed by gzip, etc.
I don't that it is a problem. In fact I think that it's better to save
the raw xml file.
> Tar has the linear approach of archive
> files together. While it is simple and appropriate for some use (tar
> means Tape ARchive, remember), it is almost unusable for a structure
> storage model.
> As a comparison, consider using Linux with a tape as main storage
> (instead of a hard drive with random access).
it seems to me that it fits with the things that we want to do.
We only need to read the .tgz when loading the file, and to write it
back when saving.
So, where is the problem with tar?
-- Joaquín Cuenca Abela email@example.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Fri Apr 20 2001 - 13:14:35 CDT