Image as database (was: Re: Minnow WIKI Migration)

Philippe Marschall philippe.marschall at
Wed Oct 25 07:10:19 UTC 2006

2006/10/24, Bert Freudenberg <bert at>:
> Am 24.10.2006 um 21:04 schrieb Philippe Marschall:
> > Having no permanent storage (save image doesn't count) is just plain
> > stupid and therefore is unsuited for real deployment. But this has
> > nothing to do with holding the whole data in the image. You can save a
> > page to the filesystem when it was edited or created and still have it
> > in the image. Pier has hooks for this since before it was called Pier.
> >
> > Having all the data in RAM scales the same way as having all the data
> > on disk. Linearly. IIRC Google can hold almost the entire web in RAM.
> > So there is virtually no limit to that. I know this is not clever. I
> > just say it is possible and the cost is not excessive (holding Minnow
> > in RAM, not the web).
> I thought we were having a serious discussion, and not just pointing
> fingers at RAM prices. Or pointing to non-existent VM technology, as
> you did in another thread.

No that is not the case. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

> I stand by my assessment that holding *everything* including all
> versions of all pages and also all uploaded files in RAM is just
> plain stupid.

I never questioned that one.


More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list