3 ms·
If you want concrete benchmarks, they compare to RocksDB and Redis around page 10 of their academic paper. (https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/uploads/pr
by fizx 8y ago
If you want concrete benchmarks, they compare to RocksDB and Redis around page 10 of their academic paper. (https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/uploads/prod/2018/03/faster-sigmod18.pdf https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/uploads/prod/2018/0...)
TL;DR:
I find their choice of benchmarks to be very convenient.
They tested on in-memory 8 byte payloads and were way faster than RocksDB and Redis. They then tested against only different configurations of themselves for configurations that hit disk. They also tested an embedded version of their software vs a Redis that hits loopback (rather than e.g. running against the raw redis data structure implementation, which would have been a more fair comparison).
- makmanalp 8y ago> They then tested against only different configurations of themselves for configurations that hit disk. In the case of Redis, AFAIK it can't support larger than memory use cases, right? And in fact they do compare to RocksDB for larger-than-memory, see Fig 10. Granted, it could be more detailed, but I think it makes their point.
- fizx 8y agoThey sure hid figure 10! Unexpected section, bad header choice, etc.
- utopcell 8y ago8-byte payloads are a necessary limitatuon of their system because of atomic operations.