Re: [cdin] Re: Distributed Data

Alan Cox (alan nospam at redhat.com)
Wed, 10 Mar 1999 10:56:47 -0500 (EST)

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: August Zajonc: "Re: Reality Check and Ideas"
Previous message: Schuetz, David: "DB: schema/design discussion"
In reply to: Jeffrey Baker: "RE: ** TIME FOR A PLAN **"

> whatsoever. What need does it meet? Even if there were a need to contact
> someone, that person would not necessarily be the authoritative source on
> that particular CD. I suppose if there were a question about an entry,
> that entry could be flagged and then that person's player would notice that
> one of their entries was flagged and ask them to double check it. If this
> is indeed a need (and I'm skeptical), then we should definitely hash the
> email.

Suppose I decide that whoever classified this bunch of CDROM's is an idiot
and I wish to ignore their entries...

> I continue to suggest we should use a simple majority rules to determine
> the correctness. Justin did say:

Majority rules. How do you know if there are duplicate votes. You need
the hash.

> How would this fit into the DNS-based system (which is appearing to be the
> most technically sound and efficient distributed solution thus far)?

DNS or WWW is just a feed to the client, Im not suggesting its used for
data collection and input

Next message: August Zajonc: "Re: Reality Check and Ideas"
Previous message: Schuetz, David: "DB: schema/design discussion"
In reply to: Jeffrey Baker: "RE: ** TIME FOR A PLAN **"