Hmm, we are talking about Btrieve are we not? Or, did I miss that one?
The only thing about large files is that cluster size affects reading time.
Making a partition with a large cluster size for large files makes a lot of
sense on pure disk IO level. In other words if you are bringing back 512
bytes of a file with every IO, it will take more IO's if each file read needs
to get more than that 512 bytes. Subsequently if you need to read for example
2K it can be read on one pass if your cluster size is 2K. If typical access
of that db is sequential you can get higher IO as it can read ahead and have
the next data in buffer already. You can easily test this by making a
partition for this test and change the cluster size.
On Friday 19 April 2002 13:28, you wrote:
> I have a couple of very large files ( in excess of 1 GB each) and I was
> wondering that if in a database that uses B-Tree indexing is it
> advantageous to put each of the large files in its own filesystem and would
> it help if that filesystem was XFS which also uses B-tree indexing??
>
> Michael C. Rock
--Steve ________________________________________________________ HTML in e-mail creates out-security, and more spam. By using it you teach others, less knowledgeable, that it's safe to use.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 20:18:59 EDT