[Sheepdog] [PATCH 0/6] merge sheep and puppy into one sheepdog daemon, collie
morita.kazutaka at lab.ntt.co.jp
Sat Dec 5 15:32:12 CET 2009
On 12/04/2009 09:32 PM, Chris Webb wrote:
> A random off-the-wall suggestion: I wonder if it would be possible to use a
> filesystem directory tree to store the catalogue information instead of a
> single large database file or the current large block file. rename(2),
> link(2) and even symlink(2) are atomic on all POSIX filesystems, and are
> presumably optimised to be reasonably fast (?). If instead of overwriting
> part of a large file, we wrote a new tiny file and then move() it over the
> top of the original tiny file, we get atomic behaviour for free pretty much
If I understand you correctly, it make us access many tiny files
when client read/write large sequential data, right?
It results in a very low I/O thoughput, I think.
But, using rename, link and symlink may be worth considering.
Thanks for a good suggestion.
More information about the sheepdog