5 ms·
Howard I always found your benchmarks as well as your comments and explanations of the results to be very thorough and easy to understand. So thanks for that. I
by eis 12y ago
Howard I always found your benchmarks as well as your comments and explanations of the results to be very thorough and easy to understand. So thanks for that. I wonder if you had a look at ForestDB which is also based on a B+-tree like structure instead of LSM and claims to have very low write amplification. They have published benchmarks[1] but there is no LMDB or WiredTiger included.
[1] https://github.com/couchbaselabs/forestdb/wiki/Performance-Results https://github.com/couchbaselabs/forestdb/wiki/Performance-R...
- hyc_symas 12y agoI attempted to test it a while ago; the test driver is included along with all the others https://github.com/hyc/leveldb/tree/benches/doc/bench https://github.com/hyc/leveldb/tree/benches/doc/bench It crashed in all of my test invocations though, so I haven't looked at it since.
- hyc_symas 12y agoBy the way, for those of you who are happy with just the raw data and coming to your own conclusions, you can get the advance look here: http://symas.com/mdb/ondisk/ http://symas.com/mdb/ondisk/
- hyc_symas 12y agoPage now updated with formatted results and conclusions.
- hyc_symas 12y agoGee, someone else collected all my forestDB comments together... http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/2iau1n/forestdb_a_fast_keyvalue_storage_engine_based_on/cl1dx3m http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/2iau1n/forestdb... With perfect candor, I believe forestDB's announcement was extremely premature.