Peter Mogensen wrote:
Hi,
An often heard argument for LDAP is that it is optimized for many reads
and only a few writes. ... And it seems intuitively reasonable that it
should be faster than an RDBMS for such applications.
Now... I have a lot of configuration data for many users, which I need
to query very often and write very seldom. There's not many relational
contraints in it, so I figured OpenLDAP would be better than PostgreSQL.
But a quick test using Perl DBD::Pg and Net::LDAP shows me that this
might not be the case. In short I tried to:
1 Insert 20000 simple objects with index on PK/DN
2 Query 20000 objects on the indexed attribute
3 Query 10000 objects on a non-indexed attribute
It's not reasonable to do any performance measurements using Net::LDAP
since that module is fully implemented in perl and has extremely slow
performance. Net::LDAPapi would be more suitable. (I gather that
Mozilla::LDAP is an updated version of this package.)
Also, assuming that you rule out the overhead of script
interpretation/execution, you haven't said anything about whether you
bothered to configure back-bdb with appropriate cache settings etc.
--
-- Howard Chu
Chief Architect, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com
Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc
OpenLDAP Core Team http://www.openldap.org/project/
