4 ms·
I really wish HYC was more articulate and less egomaniacal. He makes a lot of claims and doesn’t really flesh out great arguments. Would be really interesting
by beoberha 3y ago
I really wish HYC was more articulate and less egomaniacal. He makes a lot of claims and doesn’t really flesh out great arguments.
Would be really interesting to have him discuss with Andy Pavlo :)
- cmrdporcupine 3y agoYeah the strident and somewhat impolite tone is really hard to tolerate. Esp when directed against respected researchers like Pavlo and Leis who, well, they know what they're talking about. Everything has compromises and trade-offs. LMDB looks great. But it's also, like a lot of similar systems, built to perform best at single-writer / multiple-reader workloads. That's not the only workload out there.
- hyc_symas 3y agoIf they knew what they were talking about they wouldn't have used a raw filesystem benchmarking tool to prove their arguments. They would have used a pair of actual, comparable DBMS implementations. Single-writer is all you need if each write is fast enough. BerkeleyDB, which we used before writing LMDB, is multi-writer. It's still slower than LMDB in every workload, because of all of the lock management that comes with being multi-writer.
- hyc_symas 3y agoAndy and I have had this conversation many times over. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEa5sAh-kVk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEa5sAh-kVk Feel free to point out specific arguments that you think need further fleshing out. Every aspect of LMDB's design and performance characteristics have been documented already, happy to link you to answers to any of your questions.