[rt-devel] thoughts: uniq attachment and multiple references?

Jesse Vincent jesse at bestpractical.com
Thu Dec 27 14:41:04 EST 2001

Really, I'm not sure that 50 megs on a gig actually makes enough 
difference for this to be worth the added complexity.
What I'd be curious about is how many of these attachments are bitwise
identical.  Single-instance storage is, in fact, quite cool, if we can get
it just right.  I'd be happy to see this in 2.2, if we can make sure it's 
genuniely happy and it doesn't impact performance.  The big place you missed
in your listing of things that would need changing is in Tickets.pm,
so we can continue to properly search for tickets by content value.

Man. I wish my coffee shops were as cool as yours. ;) Maybe I can find a
contract gig in amsterdam or something.


On Thu, Dec 27, 2001 at 08:23:09PM +0100, Bruce Campbell wrote:
> After my continuing saga with importing tickets (tip, turn off mysql
> logging first lest you cause later embarressment), I'm struck by a blatent
> waste of space in RT (and pretty much all ticketing systems that I've
> seen).
> To wit, duplicates are kept on the backend in duplicate/however many
> copies.  This is a Bad Thing(tm) when you've got nearly a gig of data, and
> suspect that you can save ~5% by keeping only one copy of a given message.
> This is a nightmare when you know there might be another gig in a seperate
> queue collecting routine reports to import into RT ;)
> Looking at the 'Attachments' table, I think that you could redefine it as
> follows:
> 	Table Attachments:
> 	id, TransactionID, Parent, MessageID, Subject, Filename,
> 	ContentType, ContentEncoding, *ContentID*, Headers, Creator,
> 	Created.
> ContentID is then used as an index into another table (I know, more
> indirection) to store the actual content (which the replaced field
> 'Content' current does).
> 	Table Content (no back references needed):
> 	id, Content (blob)
> The coding changes would appear to be in RT/Attachment.pm Create(),
> Content(), Quote(). (quite likely missed other bits, but code mentioning
> Content seems to call the above routines happily.
> Would this be a good/bad thing to be doing (ie, code up and provide
> patches for, or has Bruce been visiting too many (Amsterdam) Coffee Shops
> in his lunch break? ;)
> -- 
>                              Bruce Campbell                            RIPE
>                                                                         NCC
>                                                                  Operations
> _______________________________________________
> rt-devel mailing list
> rt-devel at lists.fsck.com
> http://lists.fsck.com/mailman/listinfo/rt-devel

http://www.bestpractical.com/products/rt  -- Trouble Ticketing. Free.

More information about the Rt-devel mailing list