• From: Matt Sergeant <matt@s...>
• To: Jonathan Borden <jborden@m...>
• Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 00:02:31 +0100 (BST)

On Mon, 24 Jul 2000, Jonathan Borden wrote:

> alternatively, one could wrap the filesystem in a DOM/XPath accessor and let
> the filesystem code perform the access checks for you. I think it would take
> less code to wrap the filesystem *BUT* one could always munge Xerces to
> provide ACL behavior.
> 
> My gut feeling is that using a filesystem designed for lots of small files
> will give the proper level of concurrency and access control. Which do y'all
> think would be the most efficient?

Concurring with Walter, it has to be some sort of DBMS. I was merely
suggesting XPath as the matching language.

-- 
<Matt/>

Fastnet Software Ltd. High Performance Web Specialists
Providing mod_perl, XML, Sybase and Oracle solutions
Email for training and consultancy availability.
http://sergeant.org | AxKit: http://axkit.org

• References:
  • Re: Healthcare and Security/Privacy
    • From: Jonathan Borden <jborden@m...>

• Prev by Date: RE: XML in .NET - more than just SOAP?
• Next by Date: Re: Security/Privacy & Storage
• Previous by thread: Re: Healthcare and Security/Privacy
• Next by thread: Re: Healthcare and Security/Privacy
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread