Re: Conf: argue !

> 1. preloading using files
> 2. exclusive db_access.
>
> Now caching comes into discussion. I'm lost on the intended use of 
> conf.
>
> I mean, to have code for both opinions is easy. Stronger, it would 
> allow
> for custom code to access f.i. dbase_files (isn't that berkeley db?).
> It's an option to let users code such thing. By design, that is.
>
> Why would we translate and cache conf: on the fly *and* cache the 
> config ?

?

> There is the egg-chicken problem. Conf: needs a configuration when it 
> is
> db_based. Is there an elegant solution for this?

I'm mystified as to what the problem is?

_a