Eitan Zahavi wrote:
Is the intention to speed up SA queries? Or is it to have persistent storage of them?
I want both. :)
I think we should focus on the kind of data to cache, how it is made transparently available to any OpenIB client and how/when is it invalidated by the SM. We should only keep the cache data in memory not on disk.
In order to support advanced queries efficiently, some sort of indexing scheme would be needed. This is what a database system would provide, saving us from having to implement that part. The fact that the database could also provide persistent storage and triggers are just additional advantages.
Later if we want to make it persistent or even stored in LDAP/SQL... I do not care. But the first implementation should be in memory.
I think that you're assuming that an initial implementation that is done just in memory would be quicker to complete. I'm not really wanting to write a complete throw-away solution capable of supporting only one or two very simple queries efficiently.
BTW: most of the databases referred by these mails are not supporting distributed shadow copies of a centrally controlled tables.
Personally, I'd be happy with a simple database that provided nothing more than indexing and query support.
- Sean _______________________________________________ openib-general mailing list [email protected] http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
