Hi, Leeuw, On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 12:44:10 +0200 "Leeuw van der, Tim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> (I'm not sure if it's a good idea to create a PG-specific FS in your > OS of choice, but it's certainly gonna be easier than getting FS code > inside of PG) I don't think PG really needs a specific FS. I rather think that PG could profit from some functionality that's missing in traditional UN*X file systems. posix_fadvise(2) may be a candidate. Read/Write bareers another pone, as well asn syncing a bunch of data in different files with a single call (so that the OS can determine the best write order). I can also imagine some interaction with the FS journalling system (to avoid duplicate efforts). We should create a list of those needs, and then communicate those to the kernel/fs developers. Then we (as well as other apps) can make use of those features where they are available, and use the old way everywhere else. Maybe Reiser4 is a step into the right way, and maybe even a postgres plugin for Reiser4 will be worth the effort. Maybe XFS/JFS etc. already have such capabilities. Maybe that's completely wrong. cheers, Markus -- markus schaber | dipl. informatiker logi-track ag | rennweg 14-16 | ch 8001 zürich phone +41-43-888 62 52 | fax +41-43-888 62 53 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | www.logi-track.com ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
