Hi, for that benchmark has been used OrientDB 1.3 released 1,5 years ago... We improved so many things so it's hard to compare it to the last 1.7. And we've other independent benchmarks that say the opposite:
http://www.orientechnologies.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/xgdbench_cloudcom2012.pdf Lvc@ On 12 April 2014 17:44, Celso Axelrud <[email protected]> wrote: > I checked the work from Vojtˇech Kolomiˇcenko at > > http://www.ksi.mff.cuni.cz/~holubova/dp/Kolomicenko.pdf > He stated the following in his conclusions: > > "Arguably the strongest reason for GDBs to exist is the need of efficient > implementation of traversal operations on persistent graph data. In this > area Neo4j57 > > and DEX clearly outperform the rest of the systems, mainly because of the > specialization of their backends for exactly this type of queries. Neo4j > was constantly > > achieving the best performance even in the other tests, followed by DEX > and Titan... > > On the other hand, it was shown that directly using a document-oriented > database or even relational database for graph operations is not very > efficient." > > My questions are: Is this last statement correct? If yes, what are the > developments in this area? > > > -- > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "OrientDB" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OrientDB" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
