Ok, but the REST API doesn't produce more network overhead (i.e. HTTP...) compared to a driver implementation using sockets for access for example MySQL JDBC ?
On 10/7/11 12:53 PM, Jim Webber wrote: > Hi Antriani, > > Since Neo4j is an embedded database, the "equal" is quite legitimately to use > the Java APIs. > > If you want to introduce network and serialisation overhead, then use the > REST API. > > But I really believe that you should measure the performance of your *system* > not just your database. So if you can replace MySQL (or whatever) in your > system with Neo4j embedded, then do so and measure that. If you can't (e.g. > you're not on the JVM) then replace it with a sensible use of the REST API > and measure that. > > Jim > > On 7 Oct 2011, at 11:28, Antriani Stylianou wrote: > >> Ok,thanks! >> >> Do you have any suggestions as to what is the best way to use neo4j to >> benchmark it against a mysql database (with an "equal" in communication >> overhead manner)? >> >> On 10/7/11 12:23 PM, Jim Webber wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> When using Neo4j in embedded mode, communication with the database is via >>> in-process Java method calls* since the database resides in your process. >>> >>> However when Neo4j is used in HA mode (irrespective of whether it is >>> embedded or server), then it will use sockets to maintain consistency of >>> the cluster. >>> >>> Jim >>> >>> * so I guess technically the communication mechanism is stack frames :-) >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Neo4j mailing list >>> User@lists.neo4j.org >>> https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user >> _______________________________________________ >> Neo4j mailing list >> User@lists.neo4j.org >> https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user > _______________________________________________ > Neo4j mailing list > User@lists.neo4j.org > https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user _______________________________________________ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
