Re: Encouraged or discouraged? Object database directly on reiserfs

[Hans Reiser <reiser@namesys.com>]

Szabolcs Szasz wrote:

>Hi,
>
>I'm creating an OODB for use by ISPs. Now for the prototype 
>I use plain filesystem storage, object properties (names, phone 
>numbers, URLs etc.) are all stored in multitudes of very small 
>files, collected into large directories and there are symlinks all 
>over the place...
>
>For any "classical" filesystems this is clearly a horrible abuse...
>
>It may be for the current reiserfs level, too, but much less.
>
Take a look at reiser4 next week, it will get a bit easier.

>
>Considering the future (and remembering the Vision doc. at
>Namesys), is it encouraged or discouraged to continue the
>OODB implementation atop the native filesystem storage?
>(Speed is important, but not the primary concern. Unconstrained,
>solid and versatile data accessibilty beats it --  that's why the 
>fs storage rather than adding a DBMS engine.)
>
>Thanks very much,
>Sab
>
>
>
>  
>
Is it a GPL OODB?

If it is a GPL OODB, we encourage you to do it, we'll answere your 
questions and be helpful, but we will try to obsolete you someday.

If it is not a GPL OODB, you might consider forming a commercial 
relationship with us.

Hans