Wine's Registry Format
syllogism711 at gmail.com
Sat Jun 18 07:31:02 CDT 2005
David Lee Lambert wrote:
>On Thursday 16 June 2005 11:20 pm, you wrote:
>>On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 22:22:56 +0200, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
>>>Actually the current method is probably the fastest for everything
>>>except the initial read.
>>The only reason that the current method is fast is because we're loading
>>the entire registry into memory. As stated in Bugzilla, this is fine for
>>small registries, but the author of the bug has noted wineserver allocated
>>up to 30MB when wine initiates JUST for the registry!
>How do you propose to keep track of multiple sources of the registry data? At
>one time Wine supported system-wide registry files as well as per-user ones,
>and some people would like to see that again.
I'm not certain what you mean by multple sources of the registry
- but if you're clearifying yourself with your second sentence here, I'm
sure it I could bring back that feature if I get the opportunity to and
allow system registry files as well as user registry files.
>>Using BerkeleyDB to access the registry would provide the kind of
>>random-access that we need for such a large amount of information
>Samba already uses something called 'TDB', and it's been suggested that the
>two projects could share a case-insensitive-filename layer based on it;
>could you look into using that?
I've not heard of this 'TDB' before, nor do I know anything about
that situation, however, again - given the opportunity - I will look
into whatever the community wants before I make any decisions about how
the project will be done.
>>would also provide us with a quicker and easier way to search through the
>>registry - so we could finally implement the Find feature in wine's
>>regedit without much effort ( Not that it couldn't be done as is, but
>>things would definitely be easier ).
>This could only be done at the expense of several times increase in on-disk
>storage, and would actually not be used very much.
I'm not certain you're correct there, and I've been frustrated
before when wine's regedit has that menu item disabled when I wanted to
use it lol :)
At any rate, again, I'm not saying one way or the other about how
this is going to work yet (if at all). I'll look into it.
>A more useful enhancement would be to support PCRE syntax for
>find-and-replace, or multiple views of data, or version-control of the
>registry... in fact, there are Windows programs that do all that, and all
>they require is a good, stable, quick implementation of the registry calls,
>which is what Wine provides.
I agree with you there, that would be a nice feature to have -
especially if the registry goes binary. . . I'm sure there are some
people that would normally use techniques like that with their current
registry files. . .
Again, however, I'm not doing anything except research until
Alexandre gives me the 'go ahead'.
Thanks everyone who has been throwing out ideas, they're helpful and
More information about the wine-devel