xdb_file -- Was: RE: [JDEV] mod_auth_radius

[zad]

Hello David, others,

We can still use the file system and get around administering a DBMS, which
can be cumbersome, by using a directory hash algorithm to save user.xmls. I
have already done a patch to xdb_file.c that does that and have been using
that for a while (works fine for me).

The logic is to calculate a directory name of 0 to 999 for each user, based
on the username provided. So eventually, under spool/myserver we will have
1000 directories names 0-999. The directories are created as needed. The
advantage of this option is that your user.xml files get distributed pretty
evenly across 1000 subdirectories, so you won't have a performance hit
untill each directory grows to 10000 files, which is pretty high to reach.
This is the logic behind some mail systems.

I have already uploaded this into download.jabber.org (xdb_hash.tar.gz) and
"really wish" to see it make it into the standard server code.
Any advice or input is appreciated.

zad



> -----Original Message-----
> From: jdev-admin at jabber.org [mailto:jdev-admin at jabber.org]On
> Behalf Of David Waite
> Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2001 4:23 AM
> To: jdev at jabber.org
> Subject: Re: [JDEV] mod_auth_radius
>
>
> The filesystem actually does pretty well under ext2 until you get
> to a certain
> # of users (10,000?). The inode tables basically become a linked
> list once you
> get over a certain size, so you end up having a big performance hit
> finding/opening/saving files. Reiser could probably handle this
> much better;
> its my understanding that it creates a btree for inodes.
>
> -David Waite
>
> temas wrote:
>
> > Mostly just because it is on the disk.  It does do cacheing and other
> > things like that so it's not horrid but cacheing does cost RAM.  Just
> > considerations.  Don't know about any numbers comparing xdb_file on ext2
> > vs Reiser or anything like that.
> >
> > --temas
> >
> > On 16 May 2001 10:02:30 +1000, Robert Norris wrote:
> > > > can easily accomplish that with a jabber setup.  The
> current xdb_file
> > > > would work ok, but not well, plenty of others out there now though.
> > >
> > > Does xdb_file not scale well because of the way its implemented, or
> > > because its stores its data on disk? What if I was to use
> (say) ReiserFS,
> > > for the spool, would it do any better?
> > >
> > > Rob.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > jdev mailing list
> > jdev at jabber.org
> > http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev
>
> _______________________________________________
> jdev mailing list
> jdev at jabber.org
> http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev
>