comment
This commit is contained in:
parent
b6efba8139
commit
51d59fb260
1 changed files with 19 additions and 0 deletions
|
@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
|
||||||
|
[[!comment format=mdwn
|
||||||
|
username="joey"
|
||||||
|
subject="""comment 14"""
|
||||||
|
date="2021-08-12T18:42:03Z"
|
||||||
|
content="""
|
||||||
|
I've implemented a tailVerify; all that remains to be done is hook
|
||||||
|
all special remotes that retrieve to a file up to use it.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
That's mostly ones using fileRetriever, which will come down to making
|
||||||
|
retrieveChunks use it, probably. Although it may be that a few of them,
|
||||||
|
like Remote.Directory, could avoid using it and feed the verifier
|
||||||
|
themselves, more efficiently.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
There are also a couple of special remotes that don't use fileRetriever or
|
||||||
|
retrieveChunks but could also use tailVerify. Looks like only Remote.BitTorrent
|
||||||
|
and Remote.Web. But bittorrent is just the kind of thing that tailVerify
|
||||||
|
will not support well due to random access. And Remote.Web could feed the
|
||||||
|
verifier itself.
|
||||||
|
"""]]
|
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue