Image as database
janko.mivsek at eranova.si
Mon Oct 23 20:17:14 UTC 2006
I also have that idea for a while and together with Michael Lucas-Smith
we started to work on something like that on VisualWorks, it's called
Prevayler and on my wiki you can find more about it:
I think that a Prevayler is quite easily achievable especially on
VisualWorks, because it supports so called object immutability, that is,
you can set an object read-only and when someone try to change it, an
UHE is raised. All a Prevayler needs is to catch that exception and save
I don't know if Sqeak supports immutability too?
Bert Freudenberg wrote:
> Am 23.10.2006 um 21:30 schrieb Philippe Marschall:
>> 2006/10/23, Cees de Groot <cdegroot at gmail.com>:
>>> On 10/23/06, Philippe Marschall <philippe.marschall at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > > > So about 300 Euros?
>>> > 64bit VM?
>>> You pay the hosting bills for a new box? ;)
>> I'm willing to pay 2 GB of RAM if that's what is needed to run Pier.
>> That Squeak can't handle this is a Squeak specific limitation that has
>> nothing to do with the point that memory is that cheap.
>> As pointed out numerous times on squeak-dev and disputed by none, all
>> VM related issues can be fixed easily by just fixing the VM. This is
>> no problem since the VM is open source.
> If we had a transactional virtual object memory that's continuously
> saved to disk (think OOZE/LOOM), that might be viable. Perhaps with
> Magma you could have almost the same semantics, just be careful what you
> touch. But not with the current object memory. No way. Not if you care
> about the data.
> It's not about RAM being cheap or not. It's about designing for the
> common and the worst case. Why you would want to bring in gigabytes of
> data if the working set is just a few megabytes is beyond me.
> - Bert -
More information about the Squeak-dev