Christopher Browne wrote: > Mark Burgess <mark.burg...@iu.hio.no> writes: >> The backend does not have to change. We are supporting alternatives, not >> replacing the >> backend. > > Elsewhere, you have some changes to do some SQL integration; would there > be any value to having one of the alternative be to stow this data via > an SQL engine?
SQL is overkill for an embedded database. > There may be a downside to such... It's probably not a nice thing to > introduce a dependancy on either: > > a) requiring a DB server to be installed on each host running > cfengine, or Absolutely correct. > b) introducing a deep dependancy on a central DB server, where failure > of that could cause all of cfengine to fall over > > I suspect that between a) and b), this would be a terrible idea, and > that it's *way* better to use a DBM variation. > > On the other hand, there might well be value in providing a way to dump > out the contents of a host's DBM data with a view to loading it some > place central for analysis. Buy Nova and get it out of the box ;-) -- Mark Burgess ------------------------------------------------- Professor of Network and System Administration Oslo University College, Norway Personal Web: http://www.iu.hio.no/~mark Office Telf : +47 22453272 ------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ Help-cfengine mailing list Help-cfengine@cfengine.org https://cfengine.org/mailman/listinfo/help-cfengine
