>I've long wondered why databases need to be on filesystems, other than simply convenience. [...]So it seems like you could improve performance a lot by elimina

>I've long wondered why databases need to be on filesystems, other than simply convenience. [...]So it seems like you could improve performance a lot by eliminating the filesystem layer and going straight to direct disk access. Both Oracle RDBMS and older versions of Microsoft SQL Server had the option to use "raw disk devices" / "raw partitions" instead of the filesystem. It had some obvious justifications such as avoiding the "wasteful double buffering" of the file system cache being redundant to the database's cache and avoiding "unnecessary" extra i/o abstraction layers. Microsoft later got rid of that option because it wasn't worth the tradeoff of a small performance gain while losing the easier management aspects of NTFS file system.