[pulseaudio-discuss] RFC: pa_database to adopt hdf5?
ibmalone at gmail.com
Mon Jun 24 23:59:10 PDT 2013
On 25 June 2013 04:49, Jason Newton <nevion at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 7:59 AM, Tanu Kaskinen
> The data stored within HDF5 files is structured and the metadata makes
> the files self-describing of their contents. This allows external
> programs such as the HDF File viewer, matlab, and pytables to work
> with the files contents trivially in comparison to trying to work with
> the opaquely stored blobs the tuple stores currently provide. Will
> this always be of use? I'd figure no, but much like you've said with
> ini files, there's some nice benefits to being able to peek inside
> these files and change values. OTOH hdf5 allows a richer description
> of the file format than an ini would. If that file would be of
> nontrivial complexity, hdf5 will win out as well in size due to it's
> binary data oriented nature.
Having followed this thread for a while I'm wondering why HDF5, which
seems geared towards large numerical datasets and rather specialist,
would be preferable to sqlite if a dedicated database library is
needed for application settings.
More information about the pulseaudio-discuss