Actually, spamdyke's configuration file is typically so small and so frequently accessed that it should remain cached in memory. This would basically have the same effect as putting it on a RAM disk.
I added the configuration file because spamdyke's option list had grown to the point that configuring it with command line switches was becoming very tedious and error-prone. Plus, tcpserver must be restarted each time the command line is changed, which makes configuration changes more painful than really necessary. I can't find my notes at the moment, but I believe I tested the speed of config file parsing versus command line parsing after I implemented the configuration file feature. I seem to recall that configuration files turned out to be faster (by very a small margin). You are correct, however, that theoretical arguments about speed improvements with different technologies are almost always useless -- it's possible to create slow code with any technology and it's very difficult to know how external factors (like disk caching) will affect speeds anyway. It's fun to think and talk about, though, which is why I do it. :) -- Sam Clippinger BC wrote: > I'm not a savvy programmer, so consider that when reading my comments. > > On 10/23/2009 spamdyke-users-requ...@spamdyke.org wrote: > > >> I'm thinking that no database might just be the best for this >> particular application (spamdyke). >> >> I don't know where people get the idea that databases provide better >> performance than a native filesystem. The database is implemented on >> top of a native filesystem after all. ;) >> > > I think there is some joking about such an argument. Short of trying it > out both ways, who is to know? > >> If someone is really interested in speed, why not simply put >> spamdyke's config file(s) on a ram drive? >> > > Would that materially speed things up? I don't know. I remember when > Sam opted for no config file over just command line arguments. As I > understood it, the config file might be too slow. Is the config file > approach taken now because it doesn't slow things up much or where the > command line arguments exceeding the max allowed by *nix? > > _______________________________________________ > spamdyke-users mailing list > spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org > http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users > _______________________________________________ spamdyke-users mailing list spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users
