RE: [Catacomb] PHP ...
Definitely, a hashed directory structure will not solve the PHP problem or
other module related problem such as CGI, SSI or autoindex.
So I think we should give user several options using a directive such as:
CatacombContent dbms # Store the resoruce content into DBMS
CatacombContent hash # Store the resource content into a hashed directory
CatacombContent filesystem # Store the resource file system like dav_fs.
Chris, do you think adding the 'CatacombContent filesystem' option from your
hashed structure module is easy?
Sung Kim, http://www.cse.ucsc.edu
From: Chris Knight [mailto:Christopher.D.Knight@nasa.gov]
Sent: Friday, May 23, 2003 1:20 PM
To: Elias Sinderson
Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org; Kai Pan; Chris Knight; Jim Whitehead
Subject: Re: [Catacomb] PHP ...
Elias Sinderson wrote:
>> [...] My organization is looking at using Catacomb as the document
>> repository for a learning management system. We need PHP support to
>> authenticate users to content. Would it be easier to go with
>> mod_davfs right now and migrate to catacomb later - or should we wait
>> for catacomb's next release? And, will it be a painful transition to
>> the next release if we have accumulated a lot of content in the
>> current system?
> When do we think we can get the next release out with the filesystem
> support? It would seem that we should also plan on making a utility
> available with the distribution which allows users to migrate to/from
Hmm, currently with storing resources in a hashed directory structure,
we handle GET requests. The question is, can this still work with
something like PHP where the Apache web server interprets the code
before sending back the results?
The hashed directory storage mechanism is in a CVS branch and passed
Litmus. I'd like to have someone review the code before it's merged into
the main trunk as I had to make some design choices in developing it.