"Phillip J. Eby" wrote:
> At 08:10 AM 11/30/00 -0500, Jim Fulton wrote:
> >
> >I don't think Data.fs will go away.  I do expect it to be relagated to
> >initial evaluation and development projects. Use of Berkely DB in
> >transactional mode requires a significant andminstration commitment.
> >Log files need to be purged. Backup and recovery processes need to be in
> >place.
> FWIW, Ty and I talked about using a daemonic thread in BerkeleyStorage to
> run periodic checkpoints and purge logfiles.  AFAIK, backups of BerkeleyDB
> require only that you make a copy of all the associated files.  Recovery's
> a bit trickier, of course.  (We never got around to implementing it because
> our tests showed that BerkeleyDB didn't solve the performance issue we were
> trying to solve.  So we quit working on it at that point.)

I don't think the storage should get involved with this. There are alot
of knobs and possible policies that can be used. This is all well documented
and supported by Sleepycat Software. IMO, when someone uses a Berkeley DB storage
they are using Berkeley DB and should learn how to administer it. I don't
think it's a good idea to try to hide this from people.


Jim Fulton           mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]   Python Powered!        
Technical Director   (888) 344-4332            http://www.python.org  
Digital Creations    http://www.digicool.com   http://www.zope.org

Zope-Dev maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

Reply via email to