Just some observations from reading the paper:
o only one comparison is done with real durability? We usually just up
# of users or operations per transaction to show increased throughput
while not being I/O bound.
o great marketing on that first durability graph, I looked at it and
couldn't understand why we were half the speed then saw that we were
83 vs. 89 inserts/sec.
o I believe the insert numbers should be better for derby in 10.2.
o I wonder if our use of file sync during consistency points is hurting
us in the other write-sync tests?
Mike Matrigali wrote:
From a posting on the user list:
I actually just found a whitepaper
"Oracle Berkeley DB Java Edition vs Apache Derby: A Performance Comparison"
http://www.oracle.com/technology/products/berkeley-db/pdf/je-derby-performance.pdf
Just copying there conclusion here:
"The Berkeley DB Java Edition Persistence API is a high performance,
complete solution for Java object persistence. Berkeley DB Java Edition
performance exceeds Derby performance in every test, by a factor of 3 to
10, clearly demonstrating the superior performance of Berkeley DB Java
Edition"
Cheers
Kasper
