I am in favor of this. Toru Maesaka <[email protected]> wrote:
>+1 > >If we use Tokyo Cabinet, we can still use b-tree index (specifically >it is b+tree) and still get the advantage of hash tables via it's hash >database API (which is the lower layer of it's b+tree database API). > >Tokyo Cabinet is significantly faster than BDB and it will not bomb >out on large data. There are few very large shops that I know are >currently using it but I'm not sure if it's appropriate to name them >now. > >I can say that mixi.jp is using it though. > >Hmm guess the most convincing thing to do is actually try replacing >MEMORY with TC and take a sysbench of it... I'll see if I can get around >to doing that (unless someone else wants to do it of course). > >Oh, and the author of Tokyo Cabinet happens to sit next to me so >I can poke him anytime if we ever come across any issues. > >Cheers, >Toru > >On Apr 28, 2009, at 5:26 AM, Baron Schwartz wrote: > >> Suggestion: consider replacing Memory with Tokyo Cabinet. Then you >> get both properties of indexes in one index (hash + ordering for >> ranges and scans). >> >> I have a customer who tried out TC but I haven't done so myself. He >> told me it was much faster than BerkeleyDB. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss >> Post to : [email protected] >> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss >> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > > >_______________________________________________ >Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss >Post to : [email protected] >Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss >More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
