4 ms·
After thinking for a bit, I think their results are actually reasonable. Their graphs are relative to how SQLight performs on the same machine. When measuring a
by Const-me 7y ago
After thinking for a bit, I think their results are actually reasonable.
Their graphs are relative to how SQLight performs on the same machine.
When measuring absolute numbers i.e. CPU cycles, all modern versions of Windows have comparable overhead on opening files, it’s the same file system and the kernels are quite similar.
When a drive is slow, that overhead is masked by IO cost which almost equally applies to SQLight and NTFS. For a fast SSD that overhead is much higher than the cost of doing IO, hence the results.