[sldev] How Far For Security?

[Argent Stonecutter]

On 2008-06-21, at 18:33, Callum Lerwick wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 21, 2008 at 3:14 PM, Argent Stonecutter  
> <secret.argent at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 2008-06-21, at 01:12, Callum Lerwick wrote:
>>> I may be late to the party here, but mark my words, if the cache  
>>> is changed to anything other than plain, complete files in a  
>>> standard file format, it will be the final nail in the coffin for  
>>> my already tenuous faith in Linden Lab's collective engineering  
>>> sense.

>> Even if a non-standard format that's a serialization of the  
>> internal structures is faster and more efficient?

> Until you have to change the internal structures and suddenly your  
> cache needs to be wiped and re-filled.

Um, it's a cache. It's not a big deal if it gets wiped and refilled  
after an upgrade of the viewer. In fact some viewer upgrades have  
routinely wiped the cache, and almost nobody even noticed. Did you?

Changes in format happen at most once every few months. The current  
cache turns over in minutes in some areas. A huge speedup in cache  
performance in exchange for *fewer* cache flushes seems a pretty  
reasonable tradeoff... heck, it's not a trade-off at all.

>> There's no solid engineering reason to go with a standard file  
>> format for a *cache*.

> Seriously, have we not been bitten by lack of engineering foresight  
> in SL infrastructure enough as it is?

Yep. Using a standard file format for the cache is one of the  
examples: it's added complication to the cache and slowed it down and  
is the reason for this discussion.

And I'd really like to see how you are proposing SL request a direct  
disk-to-GPU transfer without writing your own driver.