[Home] [Groups] - Message: [Prev in Group] [Next in Group]

nu.kanga.list.mud-dev

25820: RE: [MUD-Dev] Is database access a bottleneck?

[Full Header] [Plain Text]
From: "bradley newton haug" <brad@faithanddisease.com>
Newsgroups: nu.kanga.list.mud-dev
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 14:47:38 -0800
References: [1]
Organization: Kanga.Nu
Amanda Wrote:

> The disk/RAM tradeoff is at a very different point than it was
> even a year or so ago.  One of the servers in my basement can hold
> 8GB of RAM.  Modern servers can hold quite a bit more, and it's
> darned affordable these days.  It is entirely reasonable, if your
> data set is of such a size, to throw it all into RAM and treat
> your disk as a checkpoint/backup medium.  As long as you stage
> your writes to disk so that you can recover to a consistent state
> when you restart from a checkpoint, life is good.

I agree, my little rant about DB/flat files was just because of the
whole 'flatfile speed myth', I don't use db's to maintain state,
just fire it up, save it and do sanity checks.  I recommend trading
memory for speed every chance you get, which is the opposite of some
old school algorithms.  I even have hashtables with
calculation/result lookups that I load at startup, to save a few
cycles in exchange for memory/slower startup.

regards
-brad



_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev@kanga.nu
https://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev