Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Compatibility with the python version #2

Closed
hardliner66 opened this issue Jan 17, 2019 · 5 comments
Closed

Compatibility with the python version #2

hardliner66 opened this issue Jan 17, 2019 · 5 comments

Comments

@hardliner66
Copy link

Is this 100% compatible with the python version? And if so, are there plans to keep it compatible?
@seladb
Copy link
Owner

seladb commented Jan 17, 2019

It’s not 100% compatible with the Python version but it’s close to that.
I think I’d like to keep it compatible, but it really depend on requests from users. I may add features in the future that aren’t there in the Python version.
May I ask why are you asking? Do you prefer I keep it compatible or do you have features in mind that you’d like me to add?

@hardliner66
Copy link
Author

I asked because it has the same name as the python version and I think it should be noted somewhere if it's compatible and if it will stay this way.

If it's compatible it can be used to port applications from python to rust, if they are using PickleDb.

If compatibility is broken, it would probably be better to change the name to something different, so that there will be no confusion between the two.

@seladb
Copy link
Owner

seladb commented Jan 18, 2019

Currently it's almost compatible. Of course Rust and Python are different programming languages so it'll never actually be 100% compatibility. I agree with you that if I decide to change the interface it'd be a good idea to change the name too

@seladb
Copy link
Owner

seladb commented Jan 18, 2019

Please let me know if we can close this issue

@seladb
Copy link
Owner

seladb commented Jan 29, 2019

I'm closing this issue for now. Please reopen it if needed

@seladb seladb closed this as completed Jan 29, 2019
jmckaskill added a commit to jmckaskill/pickledb-rs that referenced this issue Jul 12, 2024
@jmckaskill
fsync before overwriting previous persist file
b2ffafe 
Standard process for an atomic update on unix systems is:
1. Write new contents to a temp file on same filesystem/folder
2. fsync the file
3. Close the file
4. Rename the temp file over top of the existing file

The existing code was missing seladb#2. If you lose power soon after
persisting a new file, the file rename can be synced through without the
new data contents. If that happens you end up losing your settings.
@jmckaskill jmckaskill mentioned this issue Jul 12, 2024
Open
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@hardliner66 @seladb