On the 27.12.2010 20:07, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 4:30 PM, Christian Stroetmann
<stroetmann@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Like I've said dozens of times, this is not about full DB functionality.
Why do you keep making false analogies?
The analogy is not so wrong. The concepts atomicity and abort/rollback your
are talking about are also concepts of the field of database management
systems (DBMSs). And once you have established the Atomicity, which is the A
of the principle ACID of DBMSs, you have the basis for establishing the
rest, the CID.
And you even went further into this DBMS direction by letting down the
requirement of non-durability.
Of course the concepts are the same. That doesn't mean the analogy is valid.
Btw.: There is even no analogy: "The concepts are the same".
Still waiting on any hint for why that performance loss would happen.
> From my point of view, the loss of performance depends on what is
benchmarked in which way.
Maybe, but still no indication of why.
If you have a solution, then you really should show other persons the
working source code.
For me speaking: I like such technologies and I'm also interested in
your attempts.
Olaf
Christian Stroetmann
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
