On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 07:41:26PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > Please try again with the -s option: > > | If the database contains multiple databases and the -s flag is not > | specified, the statistics are for the internal database that > | describes the other databases the file contains, and not for the > | file as a whole.
Okay, that works. Somehow I missed that. db5.1_stat should probably be a little clearer that the information is for the database of databases and not for the single named database inside it. Consider this a minor bug for that purpose, then. > Is there any particular reasony why you want to use hash databases? > They are rarely better than B-tree databases. The documentation specifies that hash databases perform better on large datasets where there is poor locality of reference. I have a large dataset and the first 32 bytes of the 64-byte keys are an SHA-256 hash of the individual objects which are then composed into larger objects. This does not have good locality of reference, so a hash DB is a better choice. -- brian m. carlson / brian with sandals: Houston, Texas, US +1 832 623 2791 | http://www.crustytoothpaste.net/~bmc | My opinion only OpenPGP: RSA v4 4096b: 88AC E9B2 9196 305B A994 7552 F1BA 225C 0223 B187
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
