bradleykuszmaul

5 ms·

1.
by bradleykuszmaul 8y ago
Tokutek licensed the fractal tree under GPLv2 with an explicit patent license to make clear that anyone could use the fractal tree code. I don't know what Percona did after the aquisiton.
2.
by bradleykuszmaul 12y ago
Looking at that post on Leif's drawing, I think I agree that the B-tree is placed incorrectly. It turns out that B-trees are on the optimal read/write tradeoff curve, but they are in a very bad corner. B-trees cost O(log_B N) t
3.
by bradleykuszmaul 12y ago
Many important databases do contain 100-byte rows. Sometimes the biggest tables contain 100-byte rows, and then smaller tables contain larger rows. I'd have to disagree with your assessment of the value of math. It's nice to see
4.
by bradleykuszmaul 12y ago
No, I don't think you can view a fractal tree as an LSM tree with C=1. One conclusion of this paper is that for worst-case workloads, LSM trees are not as good asympotically as fractal trees. It's all fine and good to be flexible
5.
by bradleykuszmaul 12y ago
To complain about contention under multithreaded workloads seems to be missing the point. At the point that multithreaded workloads are becoming a problem, the ingestion rate is huge (hundreds of thousands of insertions per second). For an
6.
by bradleykuszmaul 12y ago
I'm the author of this paper, and I'll try to respond to some of what has been stated on this thread. > A fully compacted LSM-tree should be equivalent to a b-tree in terms of read performance. A fully compacted LSM tree arises
7.
by bradleykuszmaul 13y ago
If you are interested in this, you should look at our source distribution's license file. We have done the work to get a patent license from MIT, Stony Brook, and Rutgers so that the users of the GPL'd code can use the fractal tree patents
8.
by bradleykuszmaul 13y ago
Sadly, we don't use TokuDB to run our web site. It's some relatively inexpensive service.