Re: Lock-free databases
From: Joe Seigh <jseigh_01_at_xemaps.com>
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2005 21:22:37 -0500
Message-ID: <qZqdnTXwDPZRWPfeRVn-uw_at_comcast.com>
>
>
> Are you talking about a read-only database that just happens to be in
> memory and isn't subject to disk latency or something else?
>
For the most part. You could make the shared segment a memory mapped file but I don't think you want to necessarily tie the disk representation of the data to the in memory representation. It's easier to consider the problem if it's just an in memory database.
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2005 21:22:37 -0500
Message-ID: <qZqdnTXwDPZRWPfeRVn-uw_at_comcast.com>
paul c wrote:
> Joe Seigh wrote:
[...]
>> >> In the case of an in memory database, you could put the database >> in to a read only shared segment and allow processes running on >> the same machine to run queries directly against the memory without >> any IPC or communication overhead. No syscalls essentially.
>
>
> Are you talking about a read-only database that just happens to be in
> memory and isn't subject to disk latency or something else?
>
For the most part. You could make the shared segment a memory mapped file but I don't think you want to necessarily tie the disk representation of the data to the in memory representation. It's easier to consider the problem if it's just an in memory database.
-- Joe Seigh When you get lemons, you make lemonade. When you get hardware, you make software.Received on Fri Nov 04 2005 - 03:22:37 CET