Re: Open source database comparison

From: "Lance Obermeyer" <LObermey(at)pervasive(dot)com>
To: "Tino Wildenhain" <tino(at)wildenhain(dot)de>, "Andreas Pflug" <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de>
Cc: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Open source database comparison
Date: 2005-10-16 03:41:34
Message-ID: 072BDB2B234F3840B0AC03411084C9AF8699C2@ausmail2k2.aus.pervasive.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy

A single database file an architecture where all of the space lives within one or a small set of physical OS files. E.g. instead of having operating system level files for each table, and index, it is all stuffed within a single file. This is not important for big database systems that are professionally managed like the typical PostgreSQL installation.

However, it is hugely important for embedded type scenarios. An example is something like Quicken. Its database is all within a single file (foo.qdf IIRC), which is awesome. Having a single housing eliminates an entire class of user errors, and is a big win from a support perspective. The classic user screw up is a botched restore, where a user restores all of the data files (*.dat) but leaves all of the index files (*.idx) because he didn't know what they were. Support guys get this kind of incident all the time...

I haven't a clue why the authors listed PG (and the others) a having the feature.

-----Original Message-----
From: Tino Wildenhain [mailto:tino(at)wildenhain(dot)de]

And whats: "Single Database File"? And why does PG have it?
Whats the point in havig it? ;)

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Chris Travers 2005-10-16 04:20:41 Re: [GENERAL] Oracle buys Innobase
Previous Message Jim C. Nasby 2005-10-15 23:34:00 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Oracle buys Innobase