3 ms·
You're biassing the test towards small files and particular file systems that don't deal with them as well, and edge cases where you think the db is highly opti
by gnaritas 15y ago
You're biassing the test towards small files and particular file systems that don't deal with them as well, and edge cases where you think the db is highly optimized; I'd imagine that's because you know outside those bounds the raw file system will kick its butt, especially given the tools that let you avoid the application entirely by streaming the file from disk.
- AlisdairO 15y agoIn fairness, while his test is biased towards dbs, it's also testing the claims that he made in his top level comment, which specified smaller files.
- gnaritas 15y agoWhich again, presumes I have to use multiple files. I can append small data to a log file faster than I can insert small rows of data to a database, and with much less effort. And my main point was, speed is not the reason we use databases, transactional semantics and query capabilities are.
- AlisdairO 15y agoRight, but he was talking about image files. edit: It's not that your point is wrong by any means, it's just that you're arguing against a point that he wasn't really emphasising. I don't think anyone, including him, would try to tell you that constant appending to a log file would be faster through a db than just a direct write to the file.