Path: newssvr20.news.prodigy.com!newsmst01.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!prodigy.com!pd7cy2so!shaw.ca!sn-xit-03!sn-xit-04!sn-xit-01!sn-xit-06!sn-post-02!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail
From: Daniel Morgan <damorgan@x.washington.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.databases.oracle.server
Subject: Re: Direct IO In RH 3.0
Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2004 14:59:36 -0800
Organization: ATS
Message-ID: <1078354741.931429@yasure>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <403002A1.3010805@removethis.yahoo.com> <pan.2004.02.29.07.17.42.816775@adelphia.net> <c1t0b4$1bo$1@news2.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <pan.2004.02.29.21.13.48.566911@adelphia.net> <3jmc40185eud2paco6hso0alnpvbd6jbjd@4ax.com>
In-Reply-To: <3jmc40185eud2paco6hso0alnpvbd6jbjd@4ax.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cache-Post-Path: yasure!unknown@oracle.advtechserv.com
X-Cache: nntpcache 2.4.0b5 (see http://www.nntpcache.org/)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com
Lines: 36
Xref: newssvr20.news.prodigy.com comp.databases.oracle.server:256241

Rick Denoire wrote:

> Mladen Gogala <mgogala@adelphia.net> wrote:
> 
> 
>>file systems (XFS reports an error). Ext2 does support direct I/O,
>>but ext3 has had significant problems with it. The latest versions 
>>of ReiserFS no longer report an error woth it, while JFS works.
>>Veritas charges significant amount of money for "Quick I/O" option,
>>which is, essentially, ability to do direct I/O. JFS for linux
>>is described at: http://www-124.ibm.com/jfs
> 
> 
> Could you provide some references to the support of direct I/O in ext2
> and ext3? If ext2 really supports direct I/O flawlessly, then it is
> worth trying - what would be the trade offs here? (Since ext3 is
> supposed to be more advanced - but the journaling option is not needed
> for DB operations, the number + name + properties of the DB files does
> not change often).
> 
> Bye
> Rick Denoire
> 

RH 3.0 is a very very different animal than is 2.1. My understanding is
that part of the incentive behind releasing a 9.2.0.5 CD pack is fixes
for RH 3.0.

I sure hope the rumours are correct.
-- 
Daniel Morgan
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/oad/oad_crs.asp
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/aoa/aoa_crs.asp
damorgan@x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)

