[Zope] Zope's scalability across multiple web servers

[Jason Spisak]

Pavlos:

> In realistic practical terms anything that involves customer's money is
> IMO BAD on a home grown FS solution (I'd rather use Oracle or something)
> 

Is it because they are not transaction safe? Or just not robust enough?

> OTOH a hit counters (and other type of counters) IMO is better at the FS
> level. Storing it in an RDBMS implies an extra
> no_hits_per_day_to_the_web_site going to the RDBMS. 

Truely an advantage.

>Also in many cases it
> is not that important if some hits are 'lost' ...

Why would you loose hits?  What exactly would drop?

> 
> With file systems like RaiserFS or XFS 

Been reading (Linux Technology Journal most recent issue (GFS in there
too))
about these, and I will be fireing up Reiser when my SuSe 6.4 CD gets here.
(Support the community with $ :)  I don't know squat about Filesystems on a
low level, but it really seems the blend of an RDBMS and is ideal.

> on these it is be possible to have huge
> amounts of small objects in each directory (and still be efficient) and
> also provide journaling support (Seems to me they are essentially DBMS).
> It is possible (but probably difficult to implement) to have a RaiserFS
> Storage backend to ZODB. A better fit than an RDBMS backend because
> then you can take advantage of all the powerful FS tools like quota
> control, selective backups etc etc.

Yup.
 
All my best,

Jason Spisak
CIO
HireTechs.com
6151 West Century Boulevard
Suite 900
Los Angeles, CA 90045
P. 310.665.3444
F. 310.665.3544

Under US Code Title 47, Sec.227(b)(1)(C), Sec.227(a)(2)(B) This email
address may not be added to any commercial mail list with out my
permission.  Violation of my privacy with advertising or SPAM will
result in a suit for a MINIMUM of $500 damages/incident, $1500 for
repeats.