Alle 02:43, venerdì 10 ottobre 2003, Örn Hansen ha scritto:
On Thursday 09 October 2003 23:34, Carlos E. R. wrote:
I understand that reiserfs is designed to be able to be... how can I explain, the database basis it self. I mean, instead of using large files and internal indexing on the database engine, move that layer to the filesystem. The reiserfs whould handle the storing and retrieving directly by records, and index it. No need to build a database on top of the filesystem and OS.
Sounds like something directly out of the IBM Mainframe world, was almost expecting to see a "Made by IBM" at the bottom.
As a user, I use reiserfs. It's reliable (haven't to date encountered any problems), has working acl support, at least in SUSE. And it apparently is fast and efficient with many, small files. However, if I were on a production system. I'd put my money on the big producers, and either pick XFS or JFS, and expecting the former to be better with large databases, and the latter with distributed (medium file size) databases.
XFS would not work with gdb on suse kernels at least. (ie: gdb will return a "cannot access process memory" if you insert a breakpoint). After discovering that, all I did was replacing XFS with ReiserFS, and the latter looks a bit faster for normal use. I tested performance with bonnie and bonnie++, ReiserFS and XFS were the fastest (at the same level), then I got ext2, then ext3... and JFS was the slowest with a big gap with ext3. IIRC, bonnie stress the system with 100mbyte files. Praise