I can't use V4 because I can't introduce an unstable kernel on the box where the app is running.
On 8/19/05, Hans Reiser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > studdugie wrote: > > >Hello. I'm looking to replace a couple Berkeley DB data stores w/ > >regular file system directories backed by reiserfs (3.6). The reason > >is Berkeley DB is slow especially for data w/ little or no locality of > >reference. I'm posting to this list because I would like to get some > >opinions on if reiserfs is suitable for the job. Currently there are > >15,079,597 records in 1 of the database. If I moved to a directory > >based db it would result in 15,079,597 discreet files ranging in sizes > >from 1 byte to 1kb. I was reading the FAQ on the namesys site and it > >mentioned that the r5 hash supports 1,200,000 files w/o collision. > >Since 15M is 12.5x greater I'm expecting massive amounts of > >collisions. So the question becomes how bad should I expect it to be? > >Should I assume the file system can handle it or slow to a crawl? I > >would really appreciate some feedback from the experts before I go > >ripping out the Berkeley DB code. > > > >Thanx. > > > > > > > > > Use V4, it has much better hashiing. >
