30 Oct
2013
30 Oct
'13
7:47 p.m.
Daniel-Constantin Mierla writes:
i have not found such a constraint in the readme. is my patch somehow
conflicting the current readme?
in my tests,
the change that i made has worked fine. in which case
would it fail?
if you define the trees with module parameters, then you have to
use
different tables in database, one for each. Those tables don't need
tname column. If you just store all the trees in one table (which
has tname column),
then don't define them in the config, just set the table where they are
stored. A reload command will reload all the trees in that table
the trees may have different types. how can you tell that without mtree
parameter?
after the patch, one db table can have many trees each defined
separately by mtree parameter.
does that break something in the readme?
-- juha