From my naive understanding, would this help with the problem ZODB has with regard to folders with many objects? Would a person who is using DirectoryStorage not necessarily be required to partition their objects into an artificially derived hierarchical directory structure?
In other words can it be a possible solution to http://www.zope.org/Wikis/zope-dev/ReallyBigFolders ? Ooo, if so any idea on ETA? Thanks, Jimmie Houchin Petru Paler wrote:
Hello all,
You probably saw my yesterday post with the first alpha of ReiserStorage. One of the questions that people tend to ask about it is wheter they can use it without reiserfs. There are two problems with not using reiserfs:
1. ReiserStorage (now renamed to DirectoryStorage) stores each object in a separate file and *all* the files in a single directory. This was done in order to let the filesystem what it was meant to do: store and retrieve files quickly. While reiserfs is *extremely* good at this (it uses a btree to store directory entries), most other filesystems do linear searches when finding a file so performance is very bad when you have many files in a single directory. This problem can be solved by splitting files into multiple directories when not using reiserfs. This would add a little overhead but it is tolerable.
2. Waste of space. Typical block-allocation filesystems like ext2 and FAT will waste alot of space in the usage pattern of DirectoryStorage. ReiserFS packs small files together in the btree, so it solves the problem, but I have no ideea how this could be fixed easyly on the other fs's.
Comments ? Suggestions ?
PS: a new DirectoryStorage release will be done today, with bugfixes and new features.
-Petru
_______________________________________________ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )