[Dev] ZODB is not a Storage Technology (Re: other formats )

John Anderson john at osafoundation.org
Fri Nov 8 14:05:55 PST 2002


Jeremy Hylton wrote:

 >>>>>>"DM" == David McCusker <david at treedragon.com> writes:
 >>>>>>
 >>>>>>
 >
 >  DM> I'm just learning about ZODB, so thanks for clueing me in
 >  DM> faster.  Now I know little but later I expect to get into the
 >  DM> nitty gritty details.
 >
 >The ZODB Wiki is a decent place to get started.  It's get links to
 >a variety of info, a couple of tutorials and a paper by Jim Fulton
 >that gets into implementation internals.a
 >
 >  >> Currently, I understand the Storage selected as the ZODB back-end
 >  >> for Chandler is the Berkely DB, but ZODB has other storages
 >  >> available, and it's certainly possible to create more.
 >
 >  DM> I understand Berkely DB has fabulous btree indexes for maps,
 >  DM> provided they are stored as one btree index per file. (Has that
 >  DM> changed?)  Does Berkeley DB provide a way to store arbitrary
 >  DM> sized objects without putting each one in a separate file?  I
 >  DM> gathered it didn't years ago.
 >
 >  DM> A conventional thing to do with arbitrary sized objects is
 >  DM> append them to a single file (like mbox format files containing
 >  DM> email messages), and then index them from other files which
 >  DM> summarize the contents.  This approach requires a file rewrite
 >  DM> to compact after object deletes, which has time proportional to
 >  DM> db size rather than deleted content size.
 >
 >  DM> I should look into the way Berkeley DB hooks into ZODB so I'll
 >  DM> have better informed ideas regarding the way it works and the
 >  DM> way alternatives could be plugged in as replacements.  I hope I
 >  DM> get around to starting this research in a few days.  (I'm
 >  DM> writing a spec at home right now.)
 >
 >I wonder how appropriate Berkeley DB is for end user applications.
 >Running a Berkeley database entails a lot of management responsibility
 >-- checkpointing, log management, recovery, deadlock detection, etc.
 >It's a database, and running a database requires some database
 >administration.
 >
 >
Yep, this is a big concern for me too. We'd obviously have to write code
that deals with this automatically otherwise we'd fail.

 >The cost of administration is a drawback for any database.  I imagine
 >that Chandler would want to minimize the amount of administration an
 >end-user needs to do.  The ZODB storage with the least administrative
 >costs is FileStorage, which works much like you describe -- append
 >arbitrary objects to a single file.  It needs to be packed
 >occasionally; pack is the operation that removes old revisions of
 >objects.
 >
 >The BerkeleyDB storage for ZODB is still experimental, but it's
 >intended more for server-side environments where there's a sysadmin on
 >hand to properly manage the database.
 >
 >Jeremy
 >
 >_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
 >
 >Open Source Applications Foundation "Dev" mailing list
 >http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
 >
 >





More information about the Dev mailing list