From: | Gavin Sherry <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au> |
---|---|
To: | mlw <markw(at)mohawksoft(dot)com> |
Cc: | Hackers List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Re: New Linux xfs/reiser file systems |
Date: | 2001-05-03 23:37:14 |
Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.21.0105040931540.24297-100000@linuxworld.com.au |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 3 May 2001, mlw wrote:
> This behavior raises the question about file system usage in Postgres. Many
> databases, such as Oracle, create table space files and operate directly on the
> raw blocks, bypassing the file system altogether.
>
> On one hand, Postgres is easy to use and maintain because it cooperates with
> the native file system, on the other hand it incurs the overhead of whatever
> silliness the file system wants to do.
It is not *that* hard to write a 'postgresfs' but you have to look at
the problems it creates. One of the biggest problems facing sys admins of
large sites is that the Oracle/DB2/etc DBA, having created the
purpose-build database filesystem, has not allowed enough room for
growth. Like I said, a basic file system is not difficult, but volume
management tools and the maintenance of the whole thing is. Currently,
postgres administrators are not faced with such a problem.
There is, of course, the argument that pgfs need not been enforced. The
problem is that many people would probably use it so as to have a
'superior' installation. This then entails the problems above, creating
more work for core developers.
Gavin
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Barry Lind | 2001-05-03 23:59:22 | Re: A bug with pgsql 7.1/jdbc and non-ascii (8-bit) chars? |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2001-05-03 23:18:13 | Re: Packaging 7.1.1 |