tdbloader2 is around 20% faster than tdbloader.

there was a marginal improvement on the 8 core machine, but as far as
I can tell negligent.

i am currently looking at a small data set <100M . need to test again
with larger sets.

Marco

On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 5:30 PM, Andy Seaborne <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 23/03/13 15:49, Marco Neumann wrote:
>>
>> this is not important at the moment but I have tested the tdbloader2
>> on several different configurations from small virtual machines with
>> 1gb ram to dedicated machines with 8 cores and 128gb ram.
>
>
> Part of tdblaoder2 are calls to unix sort(1).  Only some version have the
> --parallel flags so the default setup is single threaded :-(
>
> export SORT_ARGS="--buffer-size=50% --parallel=3"
>
> may do better on the 8 core machine.
>
> Is it faster than tdbloader?  I find it makes a difference only for datasets
> (> 100e6 triples).
>
>
>> there does not much seem to be much of a difference between the tuples
>> per seconds in load time. is tdbloader2 throttled to a certain number?
>
>
> No.
>
>
>> I can see that it takes 50k triples at a time is that configurable?
>
>
> Not sure what that is - the monitor may report every 50K but it's just a
> regular tick point in the stream being loaded.
>
>         Andy
>
>
>



-- 


---
Marco Neumann
KONA

Reply via email to