4 ms·
I don't know how fair the benchmark is, but beating Tantivy by that margin is impressive to say the least. Any plan to make it run on WASM? I wanted to add thi
by littlestymaar 2y ago
I don't know how fair the benchmark is, but beating Tantivy by that margin is impressive to say the least.
Any plan to make it run on WASM? I wanted to add this feature to Tantivy a few years ago but they weren't interested, and I had to fall back to a JavaScript search engine that was much slower.
- wolfgarbe 2y agoThe benchmark should be fairly fair, as it was developed by Tantivy themselves (and Jason Wolfe). So, the choice of corpus and queries was theirs. But, of course, your mileage may vary. It is always best to benchmark it on your machine with your data and your queries. Yes, WASM and Python bindings are on our roadmap.
- fulmicoton 2y agoDeveloper of tantivy chiming in! (I hope that's ok) Database performance is a space where there are a lot of lies and bullshit, so you are 100% right to be suspicious. I don't know SeekStorm's team and I did not dig much into the details, but my impression so far is that their benchmark's results are fair. At least I see no reason not to trust them.
- PSeitz 2y agoAlso we are working on some performance improvements based on the benchmark comparison, as they highlighted some areas we can improve in tantivy.