On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 10:26 PM, Diego Schulz <dschulz@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 9:50 AM, Ciprian Dorin Craciun
> <ciprian.craciun@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Currently I'm benchmarking the following storage solutions for this:
>> * Hypertable (http://www.hypertable.org/) -- which has good insert
>> rate (about 250k inserts / s), but slow read rate (about 150k reads /
>> s); (the aggregates are manually computed, as Hypertable does not
>> support other queries except scanning (in fact min, and max are easy
>> beeing the first / last key in the ordered set, but avg must be done
>> by sequential scan);)
>> * BerkeleyDB -- quite Ok insert rate (about 50k inserts / s), but
>> fabulos read rate (about 2M reads / s); (the same issue with
>> aggregates;)
>> * Postgres -- which behaves quite poorly (see below)...
>> * MySQL -- next to be tested;
>
> I think it'll be also interesting to see how SQLite 3 performs in this
> scenario. Any plans?
>
> regards
>
> diego
I would try it if I would know that it could handle the load... Do
you have some info about this? Any pointers about the configuration
issues?
Ciprian.
