sgmr* vs. md*

Started by Bruce Momjianover 26 years ago4 messages
#1Bruce Momjian
maillist@candle.pha.pa.us

I just changed the call from mdunlink to smgrunlink, but this brings up
a good point.

smgr is a generic i/o interface layer that allows multiple storage
managers. Currently, we always use DEFAULT_SMGR as a parameter to smgr*
functions, causing calls to the md* routines. Is there any value in
just removing the smgr layer completely. It was originally for a CD
jutebox i/o layer in addition to our current disk i/o layer.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle
  maillist@candle.pha.pa.us            |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
#2Ole Gjerde
gjerde@icebox.org
In reply to: Bruce Momjian (#1)
Re: [HACKERS] sgmr* vs. md*

On Sun, 16 May 1999, Bruce Momjian wrote:

I just changed the call from mdunlink to smgrunlink, but this brings up
a good point.

Thanks, I should have noticed that myself...

smgr is a generic i/o interface layer that allows multiple storage
managers. Currently, we always use DEFAULT_SMGR as a parameter to smgr*
functions, causing calls to the md* routines. Is there any value in
just removing the smgr layer completely. It was originally for a CD
jutebox i/o layer in addition to our current disk i/o layer.

I think that extra layer is a very good idea. Some new kind of storage
might come along that someone wants to use, and md.c wouldn't do the right
thing.

Since it's such a thin layer, performance doesn't really suffer. Doesn't
hurt to keep it...

Ole Gjerde

#3ZEUGSWETTER Andreas IZ5
Andreas.Zeugswetter@telecom.at
In reply to: Ole Gjerde (#2)
Re: [HACKERS] sgmr* vs. md*

smgr is a generic i/o interface layer that allows multiple storage
managers. Currently, we always use DEFAULT_SMGR as a parameter to smgr*
functions, causing calls to the md* routines. Is there any value in
just removing the smgr layer completely. It was originally for a CD
jutebox i/o layer in addition to our current disk i/o layer.

Wouldn't this be the interface for a tablespace i/o manager ?
A tablespace has the advatage of only needing a number of files
for thousands of small tables, and reduces the overhead of many
open file handles. A tablespace is also needed before raw devices
can be efficiently exploited.

Andreas

#4Bruce Momjian
maillist@candle.pha.pa.us
In reply to: ZEUGSWETTER Andreas IZ5 (#3)
Re: [HACKERS] sgmr* vs. md*

smgr is a generic i/o interface layer that allows multiple storage
managers. Currently, we always use DEFAULT_SMGR as a parameter to smgr*
functions, causing calls to the md* routines. Is there any value in
just removing the smgr layer completely. It was originally for a CD
jutebox i/o layer in addition to our current disk i/o layer.

Wouldn't this be the interface for a tablespace i/o manager ?
A tablespace has the advatage of only needing a number of files
for thousands of small tables, and reduces the overhead of many
open file handles. A tablespace is also needed before raw devices
can be efficiently exploited.

Good point.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle
  maillist@candle.pha.pa.us            |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026