2011-05-17 16:14:46 +00:00
|
|
|
[[forum/tips:_special__95__remotes__47__hook_with_tahoe-lafs]] is a good
|
|
|
|
|
start, but Zooko points out that using Tahoe's directory translation layer
|
|
|
|
|
incurs O(N^2) overhead as the number of objects grows. Also, making
|
|
|
|
|
hash subdirectories in Tahoe is expensive. Instead it would be good to use
|
|
|
|
|
it as a key/value store directly. The catch is that doing so involves
|
|
|
|
|
sending the content to Tahoe, and getting back a key identifier.
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011-05-17 16:18:50 +00:00
|
|
|
This would be fairly easy to do as a [[backend|backends]], which can assign its
|
2011-05-17 16:14:46 +00:00
|
|
|
own key names (although typically done before data is stored in it),
|
|
|
|
|
but a tahoe-lafs special remote would be more flexible.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To support a special remote, a mapping is needed from git-annex keys to
|
|
|
|
|
Tahoe keys.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The best place to store this mapping is perhaps as a new field in the
|
|
|
|
|
location log:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
date present repo-uuid newfields
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This way, each remote can store its own key-specfic data in the same place
|
|
|
|
|
as other key-specific data, with minimal overhead.
|
