My laptop reads an entire compiled linux kernel (23000 files totalling 250 MBytes) in about 1.5 seconds if they're in cache. It's about 15.000 files/second. You think it's slow ? If you want to read them in random order, you'll probably use something else than a laptop drive, but you get the idea.
Filesystem is reiser4.
If you use ext2, you'll have a problem with many files in the same directory because I believe it uses a linear search, hence time proportional to the number of files (ouch). I once tried to put a million 1-kbyte files in a directory ; it was with reiserfs 3, and it didn't seem to feel anything close to molested. I believe it took some 10 minutes, but it was two years ago so I don't remember very well. NTFS took a day, that I do remember ! By curiosity I tried to stuff 1 million 1KB files in a directory on my laptop right now, It took a bit less than two minutes.
On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 11:34:45 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Which filesystems? I know ext2 used to have issues with many-thousands of files in one directory, but that was a directory scanning issue rather than file reading.
From my Point of view i think it is better to let one Process do the operation to an Postgres Cluster Filestructure as
if i bypass it with a second process.
For example: A User loads up some JPEG Images over HTTP.
a) (Filesystem)
On Filesystem it would be written in a File with a random generated Filename (timestamp or what ever)
(the Directory Expands and over a Million Fileobjects with will be archived, written, replaced, e.t.c)
b) (Database)
The JPEG Image Information will be stored into a BLOB as Part of a special Table, where is linked
wit the custid of the primary Usertable.
From my Point of view is any outside Process (must be created, forked, Memory allocated, e.t.c)
a bad choice. I think it is generall better to Support the Postmaster in all Ways and do some
Hardware RAID Configurations.
My Question:
Can i speedup my Webapplication if i store my JPEG Images with small
sizes inside my PostgreSQL Database (on verry large Databasis over 1 GByte
and above without Images at this time!)
No. Otherwise the filesystem people would build their filesystems on top of PostgreSQL not the other way around. Of course, if you want image updates to be part of a database transaction, then it might be worth storing them in the database.
Hmm, ORACLE is going the other Way. All File Objects can be stored into the Database if the DB
has the IFS Option (Database Filesystem and Fileserver insinde the Database).
I hope some Peoples can give me a Tip or Hint where in can some usefull Information about it!
Look into having a separate server (process or actual hardware) to handle requests for static text and images. Keep the Java server for actually processing
Thanks
---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
http://archives.postgresql.org
---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
