[ Otis Gospodnetic writes: ]
> [ Dave Wolfe writes: ]
> >While I'm at it, lets make it clear that DBM is *not* RDBM. The DBM
> >cache I'm proposing should be a replaceable backend that could be as
> >simple and ubiquitous as Perl's SDBM.
> I joined late, but why not use a RDBMS for Majordomo instead of DBM
> file? Something like mySQL + DBI/DBD....why did you decide not to use
> that and go with DBM? (just curious)
We're not talking about general use of RDBMS by Mj (for subscriber
lists, config, et al), just one specific case, message files in
different languages, but that's my point exactly: the backend means of
fetching a message by the message subsystem should be modularized and
accessed through a well-defined interface such that it would be nearly
trivial to have an in-memory hash, some flavor of DBM, or even an RDBMS,
all interchangeable. What form gets run depends on what got installed or
perhaps on some site configuration switch. Just as there is an interface
(black box) to fetch a message in an appropriate language and substitute
values into it, behind that there should be in interface to fetch the
actual text string.
But to answer your question, I believe the extra baggage and overhead of
a full-blown RDBMS was unwanted by most Mj users.