OK, I think I have applied those patches correctly.
Perhaps you could do a "darcs pull" or a "darcs diff" against the repo
to make sure I did it correctly; I still find darcs a little confusing,
and my private repo was not in sync with the offical one.
However, I was green with your changes in my
On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 10:29 +0100, Henrik Hjelte wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 9:10 AM, Alex Mizrahi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > i think it doesn't have sence to apply them now, though -- Henrik already
> > has updated patches that work better (that famous instances
> > reinitialization
>
RLR> I think SQLite is faster than PostGres on our test suite. It is my
RLR> understanding that this is perhaps possible because it provides much
RLR> weaker concurrency control.
i don't think concurrency control is in effect here. on postgresql side all
is very fast!
PostgreSQL could be slo
JD> hassles. I don't really know anything about BDB, but I'm surprised the
JD> performance of a properly indexed SQL database can't get close to it.
BDB works directly with files, but SQL backend working with PostgreSQL or
database like this needs to send queries over network -- that has
signi
IE> It's the definition of linking that is usually troublesome with Lisp
IE> and licensing. If we look at it like Python as you intend below, then
IE> only the Lisp image itself need be open source (i.e. SBCL). However
IE> Lisp is also compiled and dynamically linked with the image, which
IE
