Re: [GENERAL] [pgsql-advocacy] Need concrete 'Why Postgres
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [GENERAL] [pgsql-advocacy] Need concrete 'Why Postgres |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 2670.24.162.240.126.1061553737.squirrel@www.dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [GENERAL] [pgsql-advocacy] Need concrete "Why Postgres (Shridhar Daithankar <shridhar_daithankar@persistent.co.in>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
> On Friday 22 August 2003 13:59, Andrew Dunstan wrote: >> Shridhar Daithankar wrote: >> >BTW any comments on storing an entire database in single file? I >> >don't >> > trust any file system for performance and data integrity if I have >> > single 100GB file. I would rather have multiple of them.. >> >> I don't see why not. Entire file systems are stored within a single >> file sometimes. Examples: vmware, and IIRC UserMode Linux. > > Well, half the day that I have spent on interbase documnetation, I > didn't see any WAL type logs. If transactions directly go to database > and entire database is file, I seriously doubt about performance and > recovery. > I am not saying I would do it that way, merely that I could see it working. I agree about logs, though. I could see it working as 2 files, one for the base db and one for the log. > UML and VMware are emulators. You don't want to use them in production > right? > I know companies using VMware extensively. It makes some sense in a multi- platform environment. If it had lots of corruption problems people wouldn't use it. (Personally I prefer to use VNC in such an environment). (Interesting as this is it's probably OT for hackers, though). cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: