[REBOL] Re: NTFS Stream Fun
From: robert:muench:robertmuench at: 7-Aug-2002 8:56
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [rebol-bounce--rebol--com] [mailto:[rebol-bounce--rebol--com]]
> On Behalf Of Anton
> Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2002 6:31 AM
> To: [rebol-list--rebol--com]
> Subject: [REBOL] Re: NTFS Stream Fun
> It seems much like an archive, containing a bunch
> of files, one of which is a "default" file that
> has the data you probably want.
>
> If archives were transparently incorporated into
> the filesystem, then I can imagine accessing their
> contents directly using path notation:
IMO archives solve an other problem: storage space. While streams solve
storage access. An archive always has to be handled as one piece. You
can't just add a file without "re-compressing" the whole data-stream if
you want to keep good compression levels. Streams let you look at one
file from the outer world and on to many data-tracks from your
application.
It's more like a video-tape. You see pictures and hear sound at the same
time and you don't care about it. You move the whole tape. Did you ever
just listen to the sound track or only viewed the movie track? I didn't.
> File streaming was obviously designed to solve some
> specific problems, so I am not criticising it
> as such, just the excited reaction as if it is
> some wonderful new way of expressing relationships
> between clumps of data.
What I find exciting is that we can use this feature from Rebol and that
it's very simple to use. So what's the deal? In return you get some
decreasing in "data clump" handling with different files. It just makes
live easier.
> File streams just add some special leaves to the
> branches of the hierarchical filesystem tree.
Yes, that's true but it's a level only the application controls. Up to
file level the user can do what he wants, on stream level the
application is doing what it wants. As said by others, it can help to
keep data integrety consistent. Robert
