> In article <linux.kernel.Pine.LNX.3.95.981213195126.682B-100000@localhost>,
> Gerard Roudier <groudier@club-internet.fr> wrote:
>
> >A database which is entirely implemented in user-land is technically
> >a great crap in my opinion.
>
> Where else would you put it? I suppose that you *could* write a
> database as lkm's (sybase on Novell, for example, but on that system
> _any_ third-party application is a lkm, with the expected hilarity
> when the application scribbles someplace it doesn't want to.)
>
>
> It's an application, and userland is an *ideal* place to put applications.
wow, that's heavy stuff!! Where did G.R. get these silly ideas? I saw
enough databases crash to be sure that they _belong_ into userspace! You
can discuss about parts of GUI to get into kernel (card-abstraction) and
you may develop a filesystem which is able to accelerate transaction
based systems (flat directory structure, additional ioctl's/fcntl's for
structured files, faster long-file-syncing, another protection style),
but the main system of a daba belongs into userland - there are too
critical condistions. If you set the daba into kernel and it crashes -
you will crash the kernel and the terminal holds, if you put it into
userland and it crashes there can be another process which is aware of
crashes and which is able to start integrity checker and then restart the
daba. If you are a good programmer and the database is the only product
running on that box you won't see a significant performance loss compared
to kernel-implemented-daba's.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/