7 ms·

Is CouchDB really that slow?

• mahmud 17y ago
  [Edit: Having just read the paper (really, a few screens of a presentation) I feel confident that it's safe to ignore these "findings". Something is amiss. No way memcache is slower than MySQL for inserts/writes, and on-par for queries. Just doesn't make any sense.] Hard to tell. You can "speedup" MS Access to Redis speeds, with sufficient RAM and a good caching strategy. If CouchDB is slow in one benchmark, the developers can just go out and do something "nice", like, memory mapping all the documents in the "database", and serving them with a tight epoll(2) dispatch system using sendfile(2). Speeding up databases for a benchmark is easy; scaling them for the real world is the tricky part.
  • jchrisa 17y ago
    The thing we see with CouchDB in production is that, although under low load we aren't the fastest kid on the block, as you ramp up concurrency (hundreds or thousands of simultaneous clients) with mixed reads and writes, on a multi-GB database, we don't slow down. an old BBC case-study: http://www.erlang-factory.com/conference/London2009/speakers/endafarrell http://www.erlang-factory.com/conference/London2009/speakers... Building a test harness is non-trivial, Igal's tests are a lot like ones I used in the CouchDB book to illustrate the importance of batch updates, so I don't blame him for the imprecision. Right now the best test driver for CouchDB throughput looks to be Baracus: http://blog.cloudant.com/benchmarking-couchdb-with-baracus http://blog.cloudant.com/benchmarking-couchdb-with-baracus
• swannodette 17y ago
  On this naive microbenchmark yes. Notice how fast CouchDB is when dealing with multiple documents (fetch all). Also I'm sure that on a benchmark showing many clients fetching many documents (which is a likely scenario in many applications), CouchDB would shine compared to other databases.