Wanting a pre-db4 bogofilter

[Jef Poskanzer]

Karl Schmidt <karl at xtronics.com>:
>There are a number of different locking methods in data bases that are not
>fully transactional - table locks - row locks etc that would probably meet
>your needs. A full blown transactional set up is mostly used for financial
>use where both account tables need an entry or not - (much like a journaled
>file system).
>
>I can't see why you couldn't get by with table or row locks - do you really
>need rollback (the reason for the log files)?

I think this is a very important point.  We don't need transactions
for bogofilter.  We don't need A, C, or D; all we need is I, which
is simply a matter of locking.  We don't even need row locking,
a full-file lock would be just fine.

Matthias Andree <matthias.andree at gmx.de>:
>The Atomicity trait is helpful as we need to change either all of the
>.MSG_COUNT token and the individual tokens or none, for accuracy.

So the worst case you could come up with in a non-atomic system is
that after a system crash, some of the counts might be off by one?
We can live with that.  The database would still be usable, that's
what matters.
---
Jef

         Jef Poskanzer  jef at acme.com  http://www.acme.com/jef/
_______________________________________________
Bogofilter mailing list
Bogofilter at bogofilter.org
http://www.bogofilter.org/mailman/listinfo/bogofilter