> Greg Lehey wrote:
> >
> > FWIW, I was never happy with the removal of block devices either. I
> > was shouted down with "can you point to any one use they are?", to
> > which I replied "just because I don't know of one doesn't mean there
> > isn't one, or that there will never be one in the fu
Mike Smith wrote:
>
> >
> > Doesn't Oracle run MUCH better when given raw block disk devices to store
> > data on?
>
> Oracle wants to cache it's own data, it doesn't want the buffer cache
> behind it.
Yes, now it's all coming back. It's amazing how much you can forget in
the space of a decad
Greg Lehey wrote:
>
> FWIW, I was never happy with the removal of block devices either. I
> was shouted down with "can you point to any one use they are?", to
> which I replied "just because I don't know of one doesn't mean there
> isn't one, or that there will never be one in the future". This
On Tuesday, 12 September 2000 at 10:13:16 -0400, Thomas David Rivers wrote:
>
> Julian Elischer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>>
>> Nik Clayton wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi guys,
>>>
>>> For those of you running VMWare (2) on -current, how fast do you expect it to
>>> be?
>>>
>>> I'm running it quite successful
