staff
2,096
edits
UDP API DEV: Difference between revisions
m
no edit summary
mNo edit summary |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 34: | Line 34: | ||
:::: i'm need to get list of english names of all or some episodes of some specified anime. and mylist is not a solution. well, if this is considered as ripoff.. sorry then, i'll try to look for another solution [[User:iSage|iSage]] 12:01, 28 July 2007 (UTC) | :::: i'm need to get list of english names of all or some episodes of some specified anime. and mylist is not a solution. well, if this is considered as ripoff.. sorry then, i'll try to look for another solution [[User:iSage|iSage]] 12:01, 28 July 2007 (UTC) | ||
::: what for? We might be able to come up with a good solution for your issue, however, we'd need a full account (the big picture!) of what you want to do and why you want to do it. I.e. why do you need those episodes? What triggers the request? What kind of application are we talking about anyway? ... [[User:Exp|Exp]] 20:11, 28 July 2007 (UTC) | ::: what for? We might be able to come up with a good solution for your issue, however, we'd need a full account (the big picture!) of what you want to do and why you want to do it. I.e. why do you need those episodes? What triggers the request? What kind of application are we talking about anyway? ... [[User:Exp|Exp]] 20:11, 28 July 2007 (UTC) | ||
:::: web-site with file archive. triger is: add new anime (or edit)->assign | :::: web-site with file archive. triger is: add new anime (or edit)->assign AniDB id->cache episodes. hope you'll understand what i mean. [[User:iSage|iSage]] 06:58, 07 August 2007 (UTC) | ||
::: what's the url of that page? [[User:Exp|Exp]] 08:28, 7 August 2007 (UTC) | ::: what's the url of that page? [[User:Exp|Exp]] 08:28, 7 August 2007 (UTC) | ||
:::: http://aumi.ru --[[User:ISage|ISage]] 17:33, 9 August 2007 (UTC) | :::: http://aumi.ru --[[User:ISage|ISage]] 17:33, 9 August 2007 (UTC) | ||
| Line 46: | Line 46: | ||
Is the UDP API supporting other cheksum formats? Would it be too much trouble to implement i.e. md5 checksums? | Is the UDP API supporting other cheksum formats? Would it be too much trouble to implement i.e. md5 checksums? | ||
: Needs db support, meaning exp has to grant it. --[[User:Epoximator|Epoximator]] 09:34, 9 July 2007 (UTC) | : Needs db support, meaning exp has to grant it. --[[User:Epoximator|Epoximator]] 09:34, 9 July 2007 (UTC) | ||
:: Uniqueness of all other hashes besides the ed2k hash is not enforced by | :: Uniqueness of all other hashes besides the ed2k hash is not enforced by AniDB. Meaning their use in a FILE lookup might cause some problems in case multiple files with that hash are in the db. [[User:Exp|Exp]] 09:41, 9 July 2007 (UTC) | ||
That's odd. How come AOM supports different hash-methods? (I know this may not be asked here) And shouldn't the md5sum be unique, too? I mean uniqueness IS the reason for using hash... Well I guess we can handle everything through ed2k though. [[User:Ainawing|Ainawing]] 15:49, 9 July 2007 (GMT+1) | That's odd. How come AOM supports different hash-methods? (I know this may not be asked here) And shouldn't the md5sum be unique, too? I mean uniqueness IS the reason for using hash... Well I guess we can handle everything through ed2k though. [[User:Ainawing|Ainawing]] 15:49, 9 July 2007 (GMT+1) | ||
: Well, the hashes are likely to be unique. However, this is not enforced by AniDB. Whether two distinct files really have the same hash or whether it is just an input error (i.e. wrong c&p) of the submitting user, the result is the same. You're trying to do a lookup for which you expect exactly one result or nothing at all and you end up with multiple results. And yes, most clients do support other hashing methods and also submit such data to | : Well, the hashes are likely to be unique. However, this is not enforced by AniDB. Whether two distinct files really have the same hash or whether it is just an input error (i.e. wrong c&p) of the submitting user, the result is the same. You're trying to do a lookup for which you expect exactly one result or nothing at all and you end up with multiple results. And yes, most clients do support other hashing methods and also submit such data to AniDB. However, internally they are all based on ed2k hashes AFAIK. [[User:Exp|Exp]] 08:52, 10 July 2007 (UTC) | ||
:: The real question is: Should we enforce uniqueness? It's not really a problem to implement and shouldn't lead to any problems. We have reports on uniqueness and there are atm 2x2 files with equal md5, which obviously is wrong (if you look at them). Constraints would just mean that DerIdiot doesn't have to go around and fix such entries from time to time. On the other hand, supporting md5 lookup for clients is hardly important and it'll only have a negative impact on performance (although probably unnoticeable). --[[User:Epoximator|Epoximator]] 12:02, 10 July 2007 (UTC) | :: The real question is: Should we enforce uniqueness? It's not really a problem to implement and shouldn't lead to any problems. We have reports on uniqueness and there are atm 2x2 files with equal md5, which obviously is wrong (if you look at them). Constraints would just mean that DerIdiot doesn't have to go around and fix such entries from time to time. On the other hand, supporting md5 lookup for clients is hardly important and it'll only have a negative impact on performance (although probably unnoticeable). --[[User:Epoximator|Epoximator]] 12:02, 10 July 2007 (UTC) | ||
::: Well, enforcing uniqueness in the db brings a slight performanc overhead with it, but as file additions are a very seldom event, that wouldn't hurt us. We'd have a couple of extra indicies on the file table, which would increase the storage requirements of the db. Though even that wouldn't be all that much. Supporting MD5 hashes on the UDP API might simplyfy the writing of very simple UDP clients, as there are easily available MD5 libraries for every programming language out there. For ed2k/md4 libs you might have to search for a bit. However, I think I wouldn't go as far as to enforce uniqueness for all our hashes (i.e. sha1 and tth). But it might be seriously worth considering enforcing MD5 uniqueness, especially if we might somday drop ed2k hashes. MD5 hashes would offer a nice fallback in such a case. [[User:Exp|Exp]] 08:52, 11 July 2007 (UTC) | ::: Well, enforcing uniqueness in the db brings a slight performanc overhead with it, but as file additions are a very seldom event, that wouldn't hurt us. We'd have a couple of extra indicies on the file table, which would increase the storage requirements of the db. Though even that wouldn't be all that much. Supporting MD5 hashes on the UDP API might simplyfy the writing of very simple UDP clients, as there are easily available MD5 libraries for every programming language out there. For ed2k/md4 libs you might have to search for a bit. However, I think I wouldn't go as far as to enforce uniqueness for all our hashes (i.e. sha1 and tth). But it might be seriously worth considering enforcing MD5 uniqueness, especially if we might somday drop ed2k hashes. MD5 hashes would offer a nice fallback in such a case. [[User:Exp|Exp]] 08:52, 11 July 2007 (UTC) | ||