Database Filesystem? (Was Tracker in Edgy?)

Ulrik Mikaelsson ulrik.mikaelsson at
Sun Jul 2 10:25:02 BST 2006

1) Storage has completely passed me by. But yes, it definately seems
like the kind of solution the users will appreciate, but I'm not sure
the Storage is the best suited for a number of reasons.

* Lack of meta-data indexing outside the Storage
* It still works with a file-backed database which can, as you pointed
out, go completely wasted if the filesystem is interupted while data
is not sync:ed to disk.
* Built on Glib which will probably prevent inclusion outside the GNOME project.

2) And an OODBMS would of course be the natural choice over an
object-mapped RDB. The problem is AFAIK there still aren't too many
good examples of well-performing, data-safe and language-independent
OODB:s out there. :-/

What draw my intrest to Tracker is the capability, as I understood
from the previous mails on thread, to both index meta-data of the
regular file-system, and store complete objects on it's own. Might be
a very good solution for the probably long transitional phase.

/ Ulrik

On 7/2/06, John Nilsson <john at> wrote:
> On Sun, 2006-07-02 at 00:29 +0200, Ulrik Mikaelsson wrote:
> > Perhaps not really on topic of Ubuntu Development, but a question I've
> > been pondering for a while on this subject.
> If you haven't done so allready you'd might want to checkout Storage[1].
> WRT dbms maybe an oodb[2] is better suited?
> [1]
> [2]
> Regards,
> John
> --
> ubuntu-devel mailing list
> ubuntu-devel at

More information about the ubuntu-devel mailing list