[ Date Index ][
Thread Index ]
[ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Adrian Midgley wrote: > > static is more reliable than database. > and quicker. On a purely pedantic note, I'm not sure there is as much difference between the two as you might imagine, except that databases often sit on filesystems, which may reduce their reliability to less than that of the filesystems they use. In terms of data corruption over the last 3 years here; Oracle (on VXFS) 0, ReiserFS 1, but then I deal with more file systems than databases. One of my boxes also has far more SGA than file system buffer cache, so I'm betting in raw read performance...... I mean we can all run quick if we get all the spare memory to play cache games with. Okay dirty read is less of an issue with filesystems than databases, but that is largely down to what you do with them, there is a reason files aren't "deleted" till they are closed. Don't Oracle do a filesystem product, and what is a journalled filesystem if not transactional awareness, lets not mention filesystem snapshots. ;-) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQE+fDSDGFXfHI9FVgYRAuwfAJ9D9Lf2eHRygUZCHDEumLjitqv6RwCeODOO cU4arWi5oEMZZFDCb2SZDJg= =qAO2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG Mail majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxx with "unsubscribe list" in the message body to unsubscribe.