3 ms·

"And we now have some exciting news to share: we are running MongoDB on RocksDB in production for some workloads and we’re seeing great results!" Some stats an

• spimmy 11y ago
  Like I said in the post, we're preparing a series of blog posts for next week that does a deep dive into our workloads, our benchmarks, how to repro, etc. Spoiler alert: we consistently get around 90% compression and the inserts are ~50x faster. ^_^
  • andrea_s 11y ago
    Compared to MMAPv1 or compared to WiredTiger?
    • spimmy 11y ago
      We're testing with both. Somewhat hindered by the fact that WT often dies trying to import our data, or crashes, or loses data in weird ways. :( I believe WT will eventually get there, but rocks has been unfathomably more solid for us so far.
      • diziet 11y ago
        WT has been pretty decent for us (only TB level amount of data, so probably not as much as you folks are dealing with). The thing it has issues with is occasionally using the wrong indexes and caching them, and even putting hints in does not solve the issue in all cases. It started happening on WT, but it seems to be mongo's issue and not the storage engine.
        • spimmy 11y ago
          We have a lot of edge cases in our data set and usage model, no question. Glad it's working well for you. :)
    • spimmy 11y ago
      ah but those particular compression / write rate stats are compared to mmapv1, yeah
  • tszming 11y ago
    Very cool. Btw, sorry to hijack, please also let your colleagues know that they need to update the SSL cert used in *.parseapp.com, e.g. http://sha1affected.com/results?server=doitfordenmark.parseapp.com http://sha1affected.com/results?server=doitfordenmark.parsea...
    • spimmy 11y ago
      tszming -- will take care of it, thank you!
  • lighthawk 11y ago
    > we consistently get around 90% compression For unicode and BSON?