Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [GENERAL] Postgres vs commercial products

From: James Olin Oden <joden(at)lee(dot)k12(dot)nc(dot)us>
To: The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>
Cc: Herouth Maoz <herouth(at)oumail(dot)openu(dot)ac(dot)il>, Chris Johnson <cmj(at)inline-design(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Postgres vs commercial products
Date: 1998-07-28 12:35:35
Message-ID: 81Jul27.072548edt.35713@gateway.lee.k12.nc.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general
>         The other problem with trying to implement RAW devices, and,
> granted, I could be over cmplicating it, but how do you implement it
> across X operating systems running Y platforms?  Doesn't each of them
> access drives differently?  And, in some cases, multiply that by two for
> IDE vs SCSI...or...vs...?

  That is the real problem.  I have to assume whenever you start implementing raw
devices, you go far far away from DBMS design to OS design.  Perhaps you do not
have to write the process control part of an OS, but (I mean this jokingly) in
one's arrogance one must think you can access the HD's more efficiently than the
OS can.  Hey, maybe some can do this, and have enough knowledge about HD's and
controllers to do this, but making this portable is got to a _lot_ of work.

Not that it couldn't be done, or that it wouldn't be eventually a good idea
(*though I am not certain about that)...james


In response to

Responses

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: Chris JohnsonDate: 1998-07-28 14:37:18
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] How to know when to vacuum
Previous:From: Herouth MaozDate: 1998-07-28 12:31:04
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Postgres vs commercial products

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group