Re: copy-on-write (CoW) B-tree vs append-only log + non-CoW B-tree, why not both?<p>I.e., just write one file (or several) as a B-tree + a log, appending to log, and once in a while merging log entries into the B-tree in a CoW manner. Essentially that's what ZFS does, except it's optional when it really shouldn't be. The whole point of the log is to amortize the cost of the copy-on-write B-tree updates because CoW B-tree updates incur a great deal of write magnification due to having to write all new interior blocks for all leaf node writes. If you wait to accumulate a bunch of transactions then when you finally merge them into the tree you will be able to share many new interior nodes for all those leaf nodes. So just make the log a first-class part of the database.<p>Also, the log can include small indices of log entries since the last B-tree merge, and then you can accumulate even more transactions in the log before having to merge into the B-tree, thus further amortizing all that write magnification. This approaches an LSM, but with a B-tree at the oldest layer.