Home
| Calendar
| Mail Lists
| List Archives
| Desktop SIG
| Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU |
On Wed, Oct 02, 2002 at 10:53:58AM -0400, Scott Prive wrote: > I haven't done a bit of work in this area, but I have read how the embedded and floppy Linux systems work: they conserve space (other filesystem reasons also?) by creating a monolithic file that handles everything, and just create links from the "files" to the file that has everything. Sounds like a DBMS :-). > > -----Original Message----- > > From: John Chambers [mailto:jc at trillian.mit.edu] > > Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 10:40 AM > > To: discuss at blu.ORG; discuss at blu.ORG > > Subject: How to best do zillions of little files? > > > > ... > > > > There's also the possibility of trying the DB systems, but it'd be a > > bit disappointing to spend months doing this and find that the best > > case is an order of magnitude slower than the dumb nested-directory > > approach. (I've seen this already so many times that I consider it > > the most likely outcome of storing files as records in a DB. ;-) At the risk of apostasy... have you tried this with commercial DBMSes or only free ones? There are many ways to make DBMSes a slow solution, including bad design of the database, naive management of connections and other resources, and failure to do routine DB maintenance. A well designed and administered DBMS solution should do very well on this sort of problem. Nathan Meyers nmeyers at javalinux.net
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups | |
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities. |