Subject | Re: Secondary file question |
---|---|
Author | tcaduto |
Post date | 2002-06-03T02:19:49Z |
Helen,
Thanks for the response, I know the diff between the two, I just
figured everyone would know I was talking filesystem.
The kernel we are using is 2.14.18, I assume it can support files
larger than 2gb.
It's just a convienence thing when you don't have to monkey around
with secondary files.
I would have figured that the linux 64bit FILE I/O would have been
fixed already, since that is the great thing about open source.
Thanks,
Tony Caduto
Thanks for the response, I know the diff between the two, I just
figured everyone would know I was talking filesystem.
The kernel we are using is 2.14.18, I assume it can support files
larger than 2gb.
It's just a convienence thing when you don't have to monkey around
with secondary files.
I would have figured that the linux 64bit FILE I/O would have been
fixed already, since that is the great thing about open source.
Thanks,
Tony Caduto
>refers
> Of course! See the Opguide.
>
> Also, you need to de-confuse yourself about "64-bit linux". 64-bit
> to system bandwidth - a kernel issue - does your Linux kernel supportfilesystem
> 64-bit I/O? The huge file issue is a *filesystem* issue, not a
> kernel/bandwidth one. Does your Linux distribution support a
> that is capable of handling *files* larger than 2 Gb?can check
>
> As I recall, the 64-bit problems are a real grey area, since it seems
> impossible to determine which kernels actually support 64-bit I/O.
>
> The huge file problem surfaced quite early and, quite simply, there was
> nobody at the time who came forward offering to test on different Linux
> distros. I believe Pavel developed on Mandrake 8.something - you
> the releasenotes, anyway.really
>
> It seems to me that some people are picking up on buzzwords without
> understanding their significance. If someone really *needs* highbandwidth
> I/O or huge file support on Linux, that someone would/should takesteps to
> get it.these are
>
> Some Windows platforms support both. (Some don't, as well). If
> the issues determining your customer's choice between Firebird andMSSQL,
> then the capabilities of the Linux versions are irrelevant. Theycan't run
> MSSQL on Linux; and they can get 64-bit I/O and huge file support with
> Firebird on Windows.
>
> heLen
>
> All for Open and Open for All
> Firebird Open SQL Database · http://firebirdsql.org ·
> http://users.tpg.com.au/helebor/
> _______________________________________________________