Well that's an embarrassing oversight; yes, you're correct -- the file I linked contained 5M transactions instead of the 500k I mentioned.
Here is an updated file <https://www.dropbox.com/s/feszjae0csu1jlc/benchmark_500k.tar.xz?dl=0>. I tested this with success on my machine. Just for curiosity, I have a RAM upgrade arriving tomorrow which will bring my machine to 16GB and plan on retesting the original file with 5M transactions to see if there is any improvement. On Friday, August 25, 2017 at 11:41:25 PM UTC-4, m...@my.vocabularysize.com wrote: > > OK. But you wrote: > > when I increased to 500k for comparison > > > and your file contains 5M transactions (an order of magnitude more), so I > thought that might be the source of the difference in memory requirements. > > On Sunday, 20 August 2017 04:21:53 UTC-7, Anthony Draper wrote: >> >> Yes, that's correct >> >> On Thursday, August 17, 2017 at 2:41:50 AM UTC-4, >> m...@my.vocabularysize.com wrote: >>> >>> >>> Just to clarify, the file you linked to above contains 5 × 10^6 entries. >>> Is that what you intended? >>> >>> $ xzcat /tmp/benchmark.ledger.xz | tail >>> Income:V >>> >>> >>> 2016/07/02 * Transaction_4999999 >>> Assets:C 41840.77 USD >>> Equity:E >>> >>> >>> 2016/07/17 * Transaction_5000000 >>> Assets:M 14862.41 JPY >>> Equity:H >>> >>> >>> >>> -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ledger" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ledger-cli+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
