Hello.. I am comparing the persistence of large blobs (megabytes) in Oracle relational database vs. IGFS (1.5.0.final, DUAL_ASYNC, backed by secondary filesystem) on a 64 bit, 16GB RAM, 8 core RHEL6 VM.
I notice that the other parameters remaining constant, the time to persist the same blob in Oracle is a good 200 to 300ms faster than the time needed to persist the same blob on IGFS. I am trying to investigate this further. However, are there any obvious factors that may explain this paradox with IGFS? Is it possible that the buffering of data by Oracle server in its shared memory is more efficient that my attempt to persist the blob in IGFS? Has anyone else encountered this surprising result? thanks, /Kobe -- View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Blob-persistence-performance-IGFS-vs-Oracle-tp3174.html Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
