I want to do some more tests to see if Tokyo Cabinet would really offer much of a performance advantage -- and in what cases.
Here are some test cases (Tokyo Cabinet vs. MySQL) I'm thinking about implementing (while using INNO DB and turning off ACID for MySQL): * joins (say user has many posts, say 100 posts each) * graph traversal with depth 11 and doing a read and write to each node over a graph with like 3 edges per vertex, with depth 11. It may be the case that Tokyo Cabinet doesn't significantly improve over MySQL to warrant creating an ORM for it. That's why I want to do the preliminary tests to see if they are at least encouraging. On Oct 22, 11:04 pm, Julian Leviston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > C'mon guys, > > If you can store data in a thing, DM should be able to wrap it... > > I mean, if you can store key value pairs, we could *easily* write > something the yields relationship-type mappings, right? > > I'm also keen to start using a proper object database like gemstone/s > with merb... (maglev hm? :))... because then we can write proper ruby > objects for our model with proper relationships and not use this > cobled SQL crap anymore. > > The thing then, though, is that we'd need some legacy-backuppy- > database support thing... for when we have clients that require the > database to be able to be backed up and restored to some sql type thing. > > I personally detest SQL backed databases. > > Jules > > On 23/10/2008, at 4:56 PM, Matt Aimonetti wrote: > > > hehe since my DM adapter was mentioned I guess I should give my > > opinion. > > > I actually agree with Kyle and I would probably not use an adapter > > unless Tokyo Cabinet can handle conditional statements. > > > A good example would be couchDB. I don't think the adapter makes a > > lot of sense. Don't get me wrong, it's great to have one and help > > people getting started, but DM is very much RDBMS oriented, with a > > concept of clean/dirty objects, collections, relationships. I feel, > > Couchrest (by Chris Anderson) is a better fit since it's a lighter > > layer between your models and your data. > > > -Matt > > > On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 10:14 PM, Daniel N <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 3:33 PM, Jarkko Laine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > On 23.10.2008, at 3.16, Kyle Drake wrote: > > > > Tokyo Cabinet is a cool power tool, but it's not a relational > > > database. It only does key/value store. I'm not sure there would be > > > much of a point to making a DM interface, since you wouldn't be able > > > to use most of the methods in it. I think it would be much easier to > > > just write a set of model methods for getting/setting the data. > > > DataMapper is not just for relational > > databases:http://merbist.com/2008/09/29/write-your-own-custom-datamapper-adapter/ > > > //jarkko > > > -- > > Jarkko Laine > >http://jlaine.net > >http://dotherightthing.com > >http://odesign.fi > > > There's only a handful of methods you need to use to setup for a > > DataMapper adapter as defined in the AbstractAdapter. Not sure how > > you'd go with a model id though although you can use composite keys > > etc... doesn't seem to sit... > > > ~Daniel --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "merb" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/merb?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
