[Bf-funboard] Re: Sky Generator

GSR - FR famrom at infernal-iceberg.com
Mon Nov 8 21:09:47 CET 2004

desoto at blender.spaceisbig.com (2004-11-08 at 1103.16 -0500):
> Yes in a *professional* setup where there is a networked file server. 
> Not every user has access to that much hardware however, and access to a 
> web host seems much more common. More importantly, if you want to share 
> that data without opening up your personal file server to access by 
> people outside your network, the SQL approach would seem very 
> attractive. No?
> /Chris/
> Alexander Ewering wrote:
> > 
> > On Mon, 8 Nov 2004, Chris Burt wrote:
> > 
> >> DetectiveThorn,
> >>
> >> First of all let me be the first to ask when you're "coming back" to 
> >> the Blender development process. I see you posting to the mailing 
> >> lists and I have to say that I don't think I'm the only one that 
> >> misses your help.
> >>
> >> Secondly, this idea is wonderful and I think that JesterKing has 
> >> already begun work with an SQL system that would work perfectly with 
> >> it even _remotely_. This would mean that your library of materials 
> >> could be accessible via a remote server, and you could actually save 
> >> your information directly the net. (not to mention the possibilities 
> >> of using Verse for data being access by multiple users on multiple 
> >> clients) Since many web hosts do daily data backups, this could be the 
> >> perfect way to store and retrieve frequently reused elements of blend 
> >> files without working about backing them up to DVD. My mind is dizzy 
> >> with ideas now and I hope you attend a Sunday meeting soon to bring 
> >> some more of this into light. I'm already very excited just thinking 
> >> about it.
> > 
> > 
> > Hrmhrmhrm... well, I basically agree about the niceness of being able to
> > append datablocks to external .blend files... however, that SQL stuff is 
> > a bit
> > beyond my understanding.
> > 
> > In a professional setup, your data is stored on a remote server anyway 
> > (via NFS),
> > namely your company's (or home's :) fileserver, and this server does 
> > regular backups to a suitable backup system automatically
> > without any user interaction.
> > 
> > | alexander ewering              instinctive mediaworks
> > | ae[@]instinctive[.]de   http://www[.]instinctive[.]de
> > _______________________________________________
> > Bf-funboard mailing list
> > Bf-funboard at projects.blender.org
> > http://projects.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-funboard
> > 
> > 
> _______________________________________________
> Bf-funboard mailing list
> Bf-funboard at projects.blender.org
> http://projects.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-funboard

Assuming you have a webhost that offers DB, then it has to be one that
lets the DBs talk to other machines. At most they allow with other
hosted machines, as security measure, as well as for speed reasons.
And now that we are in request mode, hosts that provide RAID and
backups as default, not as plus.

Saying SQL is better than a file server, and then ignoring the same
issues about speed or security is a bit weird. The SQL solution should
be seen with the proper perspective, when you add networking into the
soup things get nasty (as a coder or as user), we should have learnt
from past years of Internet.

"I will when others do"

More information about the Bf-funboard mailing list