>>>> "T" == Timwi
<timwi(a)gmx.net> writes:
Me> Some (most?) version control systems use a reverse diff storage
Me> system to keep storage requirements down to a minimum, at the
Me> expense of retrieval time for old versions.
T> Do we really have to do that?
No, we don't _have_ to do it. That's why it's posted as a technical
proposal and not a court order.
T> I always thought storage space is incredibly cheap (at least
T> that's what LiveJournal always say ;-) ).
Storage space is cheap. _Database_ space can be expensive, though, in
terms of maintenance and performance.
It's also conceivable, although I haven't tested it, that it's
comparable or even _faster_ to get a small diff and apply it to a
cached version than it is to fetch a full version.
T> I'm finding it somewhat irritating that you want to slow down
T> Wikipedia even more, just to save some disk space.
Well, it's mostly because I hate Wikipedia and I want to abuse
Wikipedia contributors as much as possible. The whole disk space thing
is just a facade.
~ESP
P.S. And, yes, it's me who's been slipping the sleep(10) calls into
various parts of the MediaWiki code. Bwahahaha!
--
Evan Prodromou <evan(a)wikitravel.org>
Wikitravel -
http://www.wikitravel.org/
The free, complete, up-to-date and reliable world-wide travel guide