On Thu, 3 May 2001, mlw wrote:
> This behavior raises the question about file system usage in Postgres. Many
> databases, such as Oracle, create table space files and operate directly on the
> raw blocks, bypassing the file system altogether.
>
> On one hand, Postgres is easy to use and maintain because it cooperates with
> the native file system, on the other hand it incurs the overhead of whatever
> silliness the file system wants to do.
It is not *that* hard to write a 'postgresfs' but you have to look at
the problems it creates. One of the biggest problems facing sys admins of
large sites is that the Oracle/DB2/etc DBA, having created the
purpose-build database filesystem, has not allowed enough room for
growth. Like I said, a basic file system is not difficult, but volume
management tools and the maintenance of the whole thing is. Currently,
postgres administrators are not faced with such a problem.
There is, of course, the argument that pgfs need not been enforced. The
problem is that many people would probably use it so as to have a
'superior' installation. This then entails the problems above, creating
more work for core developers.
Gavin
