[lkml]   [2003]   [Oct]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: statfs() / statvfs() syscall ballsup...

    On Fri, 10 Oct 2003, Joel Becker wrote:
    > Memory is continuously too small and too expensive. Even if you
    > can buy a machine with 10TB of RAM, the price is going to be
    > prohibitive. And when 10TB of RAM costs better, the database is going
    > to be 100TB.


    Look at the number of supercomputers and the number of desktops today.

    The fact is, the high end is getting smaller and smaller. If Oracle wants
    to go after that high-end-only market, then be my guest.

    But don't be surprised if others end up taking the remaining 99%.

    Have you guys learnt _nothing_ from the past? The reason MicroSoft and
    Linux are kicking all the other vendors butts is that _small_ is
    beautiful. Especially when small is "powerful enough".

    Hint: why does Oracle care at all about the small business market? Why is
    MySQL even a blip on your radar? Because it's those things that really
    _drive_ stuff. The same way PC's have driven the tech market for the last
    15 years.

    And believing that the load will keep up with "big iron hardware" is just
    not _true_. It's never been true. "Small iron" not only keeps up, but
    overtakes it - to the point where you have to start doing new things just
    to be able to take advantage of it.

    Believe in history.

    > > O_DIRECT throws the cache part away, but it throws out the baby with the
    > > bathwater, and breaks the other parts. Which is why O_DIRECT breaks things
    > > like disk scheduling in really subtle ways - think about writing and
    > > reading to the same area on the disk, and re-ordering at all different
    > > levels.
    > Sure, but you don't do that. The breakage in mixing O_DIRECT
    > with pagecache I/O to the same areas of the disk isn't even all that
    > subtle. But you shouldn't be doing that, at least constantly.

    Ok. Let's just hope all the crackers and virus writers believe you when
    you say "you shouldn't do that".

    BIG FRIGGING HINT: a _real_ OS doesn't allow data corruption even for
    cases where "you shouldn't do that". It shouldn't allow reading of data
    that you haven't written. And "you shouldn't do that" is _not_ an excuse
    for having bad interfaces that cause problems.

    We're not NT.


    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2009-11-18 23:46    [W:0.020 / U:4.472 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site