And if I sound annoyed when talking about TokuDB performance, I am a bit. I
wish someone else documented the performance problems it has. The problems
are known but not much has been shared to explain them.  That has been left
to me as I am promoting the other write-optimized storage engine for MySQL.
A lot of extremely talented people worked on TokuDB. A few (hello Rich)
continue to help with it. One of them is related to me (hello Tim). One of
them works for my employer (Zardosht). I wish more of them worked for my
employer (anon, anon, anon). Now I get to be the jerk.

On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 2:51 PM, MARK CALLAGHAN <> wrote:

> If your workload is insert-only and you are happy with TokuDB then please
> don't try to migrate. But most workloads have reads concurrent with writes.
> Add that to insert benchmark and TokuDB becomes unhappy. Why do we always
> get results for insert-only iibench but not for insert+query iibench? My
> client supports it -
> mytools/blob/master/bench/ibench/
> I think insert-only iibench is a silly workload with results that are
> usually taken out of context. MyRocks is great on it, with and without
> concurrent queries. So I guess I am happy about that.
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 12:07 PM, Reinis Rozitis <> wrote:
>> > I am not surprised that there are so few performance results published
>> for TokuDB. And when they are published they are almost always for trivial
>> workloads -- like insert-only insert benchmark. Try adding queries
>> concurrent with the inserts.
>> True but one can see also in your own comment (
>> )
>> that some tests in different circumstances can have rather skewed results
>> which people base their decisions on.
>> Glad it has been fixed (would be nice to see some current bench tests).
>> rr
>> _______________________________________________
>> Mailing list:
>> Post to     :
>> Unsubscribe :
>> More help   :
> --
> Mark Callaghan

Mark Callaghan
Mailing list:
Post to     :
Unsubscribe :
More help   :

Reply via email to