[IRCServices Coding] New IRC Services project

[Trevor Talbot]

On Thursday, Dec 19, 2002, at 10:21 US/Pacific, Craig Edwards wrote:

> MySQL databases arent really a good idea for an ircservices server
> on a large network - imagine the number of constant queries involved,
> it would be a much busier situation than many large websites, you

Have you actually _looked_ at some of the implementations of many
large websites?

> would have to make a query for practically every RAW irc line from
> your uplink, e.g. for checking access, etc. If not for every RAW line,
> but for every MODE, JOIN, and PRIVMSG to a pseudoclient, and every

I'm not sure what you're thinking of, but it has nothing to do with
use of a database.

> connect, NICK, etc... Not to mention that MySQL's transaction support
> isnt that good (MySQL's one and only downfall) which would mean maybe
> a database such as PostgreSQL may work much better in this case. I

First you complain about performance under high read-query loads; then
you bring up transaction support.  One of MySQL's touted features is
high performance under mostly-read conditions; part of how it
accomplishes this is through not having transaction overhead.

> have my doubts about performance though. Would connections to the
> database be persistent? Im not sure about the low level workings of
> DBMS systems but for this kind of application the connection would not
> need to be closed after each query, the slowdowns would be
> unbelievably slow.

High load websites use persistent connections too.  This is not a
new concept.


On Thursday, Dec 19, 2002, at 10:46 US/Pacific, Craig Edwards wrote:

> Dalnets services are frequently split from their uplink, due to the
> fact that they cant handle the load placed upon them :) A flat file
> db would operate much faster with reasonable hardware, no extra
> socket connections have to be established to make queries.

Uhhh... no.

You don't know the reasons for DALnet's services splits.

Flat files won't necessarily operate faster.  There are some really,
really basic concepts here you seem to be missing.  You might do
more research on why many people use databases in the first place.


In short, stop trying to debate this and let the guy implement it.
Then you can decide whether it's suited for what you want or not.


On Thursday, Dec 19, 2002, at 10:54 US/Pacific, Ballsy wrote:

> 	I don't know how real-time it is, or if it's changed in the last
> couple years, but I believe DALnet (if you want a LARGE network 
> situation)
> uses/used a shared DB scenario in that the services DBs are used for 
> their
> users.dal.net website as well.  It's possible though, that there is a 
> time
> delay and the data is just copied over...I dunno.

It's currently on a slightly-delayed synchronization scheme,
according to the users.dal.net introduction page.

-- Quension