From: | Mike Mascari <mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com |
Cc: | Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Single-file DBs WAS: Need concrete "Why Postgres |
Date: | 2003-08-22 20:29:49 |
Message-ID: | 3F467D3D.5000504@mascari.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
Josh Berkus wrote:
> Jan,
>
> In my experience (a lot of MS SQL, more MS Access than I want to talk about,
> and a little Oracle) corruption failures on single-file databases are more
> frequent than databases which depend on the host OS, and such failures are
> much more severe when the occur.
>
Vadim seemed to think differently:
In addition to Jan's points, using a single pre-allocated file also
reduces file descriptor consumption, although I don't know what the
costs are regarding maintaining the LRU of file descriptors, the price
of opens and closes, the price of having a high upper limit of file
descriptors, etc.
Just because Oracle and MS do something doesn't necessary make it
wrong. :-)
Mike Mascari
mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2003-08-22 22:42:19 | Re: Single-file DBs WAS: Need concrete "Why Postgres |
Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2003-08-22 20:05:10 | Re: Single-file DBs WAS: Need concrete "Why Postgres |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-08-22 20:43:52 | Re: WAL Files checkpoint_timeout with voluminous delete/insert |
Previous Message | Michal Adamczakk | 2003-08-22 20:19:16 | Re: mysql's last_insert_id |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Maksim Likharev | 2003-08-22 20:57:38 | Re: Single-file DBs WAS: Need concrete "Why Postgres |
Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2003-08-22 20:05:10 | Re: Single-file DBs WAS: Need concrete "Why Postgres |