mikealrogers

5 ms·

1.
by mikealrogers 16y ago
this was part of my initial reaction. when CouchDB is under concurrent load it does a "group commit" style write anyway and can batch nearly as efficiently as bulk docs. the only additional overhead would be the HTTP headers which is nomin
2.
by mikealrogers 16y ago
would you be willing to write up how your writes were outrunning the compactor in a little more detail in either a blog post or in an email to the apache couchdb dev list? we've been talking about possible improvements to the compactor and
3.
by mikealrogers 16y ago
i find this whole thing a lot more of an experiment in clojure performance than CouchDB throughput. he doesn't attach a handler to the response on his writes and is queuing writes in memory and bulking them. he's not concerned with durabili
4.
by mikealrogers 16y ago
traditionally durability isn't considered a sliding scale, it's a goal/priority which requires you to implement multiple features and fallbacks to handle everything from invalid writes, crash during write, to the data center catching on fir
5.
by mikealrogers 16y ago
it's easy to make something fast if you don't want durability, just look at memcached.
6.
by mikealrogers 16y ago
copied from my blog: @kristina for some reason wordpress wanted me to moderate your post so sorry for the delay in it showing up. >> Whoopsy, got your emphasis wrong there ….. Seriously, though, this “unchecked” type >> of w
7.
by mikealrogers 16y ago
that's kind of like saying "we told you our parachutes won't open sometimes. well, not in our conference talks or in our marketing but it's on our wiki and we blogged about it". if you want to see a message that is clearly delivered about (
8.
by mikealrogers 16y ago
wait, seriously? the suggested default step 1 for MongoDB is to acquire 3 servers? i mean, no other database suggests such a huge default configuration. even knowing that their datacenter can get hit by lightening and all a lot of large pro