Patrick Steinhardt <ps@xxxxxx> writes: > ... I have decided to rename this to `odb_alternate`. I don't think > "shard" works well, as shard is an extremely generic term that doesn't > really convey much meaning. > > On the other hand, I think that `odb_alternate` is quite a good fit. We > already use it all over the place to mean almost exactly what we are > after here. And it doesn't seem far-fetched to have an > `odb_packed_alternate`, `odb_loose_alternate` and `odb_redis_alternate` > for different backends. So a database is a collection of alternates? And the alternates are stored as a linked list? > The only stretch is that the primary object directory is now the primary > alternate. I think that this is acceptable though' This is a very important nuance, and with that knowledge it starts to click with me. I didn't read this in the commit messages though, so I think it's worth adding something about that in [PATCH 02/17]. -- Toon
