Re: Defaults
Re: Defaults
- Subject: Re: Defaults
- From: email@hidden
- Date: Sun, 1 Sep 2002 22:56:51 EDT
At 12:10 -0400 8/31/2002, I wrote:
>
>Does anyone know if the
>
>defaults system is robust enough to use as a database in its own right? Can
I
>
>create my own "com.linkedresources.whatever" file and place thousands of
>
>key/value pairs therein, where each key/value pair might be many K in
length?
>
>Or would that simply overwhelm the system? I know sorting and searching are
>
>another issue, but I just need data storage and lookup.
And in a message dated 9/1/02 5:11:44 PM, John W Baxter commented:
>
1. Naming: com.linkedresources... is robust for Jeff because he owns
>
linkedresources.com.
>
(Mentioned just so people won't think it's a generic sort of thing
>
anyone could use. Jeff, is it significant that you registered the domain
>
on an April 1?)
None at all, and you're the first person to notice. I didn't even realize I
had done it that day.
>
2. "Thousands...many K"...I would worry more than a little here. [I
>
wonder whether there will be a modern successor to the old "The Resource
>
Manager is not a database" injunction in the "Don't Abuse the Managers"
>
tech note.] At some point, there has to be a crossover to another storage
>
retrieval mechanism being "better." There's probably a reason Apple
>
doesn't store the screen saver images as hex strings in defaults format.
OK, I got the message. Bad idea, sorry to suggest it.
>
3. But...go for it. Just have the accessors--as I would expect you to
>
anyhow--well enough isolated that a switch to another storage system (MySQL
>
perhaps, or Berkeley DBM, or...) isn't painful to the remainder of the
>
script [collection].
I am still struggling to determine the database into which it makes sense to
invest significant learning/development effort. I have been using plain text
files (although I see on the Applescript Studio list that plain text is no
longer plain text, but Unicode instead*), in URL encoded key/value pairs (ie.
the format of CGI post_args), which has been reasonably efficient, corruption
proof, and reliable, but scales poorly under load, takes forever to back up,
and doesn't allow search/sort, nor transaction locking/rollback. FileMaker is
too expensive, slow, and full featured for my needs. MySQL's security issues
overwhelm me, and the GUI tools are flaky, unreliable, and obviate the
benefits of free/open source software. Valentina is a moving target (although
maybe it's moved enough by now). 4D - I can't even understand their licensing
scheme. OpenBase - pricey. AppleWorks - actually quite nice, but not for Web
work. TableServer - too slow, too niche. PostGreSQL - I may try it, but I
think I'll have the same issues as with MySQL. MGI - now that they are giving
it away, I'll take a look, but an OSX release is months away. Berkeley DB has
no Applescriptability or SQL interface, so I don't know how I would
communicate with it. If some enterprising programmer wants to make it
applescriptable....
Anyway, any suggestions for a fast, stable, scriptable, searchable, sortable,
secure, inexpensive database for use on MacOSX? If it's Applescriptable, I
can build a GUI with AS Studio.
* Several years ago, I stated with confidence, "The only thing I know for
sure about computers is that 30 years from now, we will still be able to read
and write plain text files." Now, only 5 years later, I find I may be wrong
on that count too. I guess the only thing permanent is God after all O:->
Jeff Baumann
email@hidden
www.linkedresources.com
cc please, on digest (actually buried in them, but digging out)
_______________________________________________
applescript-users mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/applescript-users
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.