From owner-freebsd-fs Tue Mar 19 15:49:54 1996 Return-Path: owner-fs Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id PAA11887 for fs-outgoing; Tue, 19 Mar 1996 15:49:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from neworder.cc.uky.edu (neworder.cc.uky.edu [128.163.18.198]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id PAA11882 for ; Tue, 19 Mar 1996 15:49:52 -0800 (PST) Received: (from soward@localhost) by neworder.cc.uky.edu (8.7/Soward0.1) id SAA03747 for freebsd-fs@freebsd.org; Tue, 19 Mar 1996 18:50:34 -0500 (GMT-0500) Message-Id: <199603192350.SAA03747@neworder.cc.uky.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 (NeXT Mail 4.0 v141) Content-Type: text/plain In-Reply-To: X-Nextstep-Mailer: Mail 3.3 (Enhance 1.1) Received: by NeXT.Mailer (1.141) From: John Soward Date: Tue, 19 Mar 96 18:50:33 -0500 To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: database filesystems, BSD worth it? Just go SCO? Reply-To: soward@service1.uky.edu References: Organization: University of Kentucky Technical Services X-URL: "http://neworder.cc.uky.edu/" Sender: owner-fs@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk >My current dillemma is that there is 'general knowledge' floating around >that the SCO/Unixware filesystem is basically the best for running a >database system on, whereas the BSD filesystem is not... I thought the best option was to just have the DB write to the raw device? --- John Soward JpS Systems Programmer 'The Midnight sun will burn you up.' University of Kentucky (NeXT and MIME mail OK) -R. Smith :::I'm not speaking for UK. I may not even be speaking for myself:::