Re: WARNING! Object DB conversion (was Re: [PATCH] write-tree performance problems)

From: Morten Welinder <mwelinder@gmail.com>
Date: Apr 20, 2005, 13:35 UTC
Message-ID: <118833cc0504200635408b5dd@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20050420132446.GA10126@macavity>

On 4/20/05, Martin Uecker <muecker@gmx.de> wrote:

Show 8 quoted lines

> The storage method of the database of a collection of
> files in the underlying file system. Because of the
> random nature of the hashes this leads to a horrible
> amount of seeking for all operations which walk the
> logical structure of some tree stored in the database.
> 
> Why not store all objects linearized in one or more
> flat file?

I've been thinking along the same lines and it doesn't look too hard to factor out the "back end", i.e., provide methods to read/write/stat/remove/mmap/whatever objects. (Note the mmap there. Apart from that, the backend could be an http connection or worse.)

It will, however, seriously break rsync as transport for people who commit to their trees. Thus you need an alternative in place before you can present it as an alternative.

Morten