On 02/03/2011 12:04 PM, Andres Riancho wrote: > Do we know about any noSQL database that's "file based" like sqlite? > Maybe we could use this small rewrite to compare the performance of > those backends. > > Regards, >
I'm somewhat at a loss of what you think "noSQL" will buy you. It's useful in distributed, massively parallel systems, but offers no real benefit for single user databases. noSQL is just the new term for key-value stores. Berkeley DB is what was used as a file based key-value store before sqlite, but has no major benefits in most uses over sqlite which is why it didn't spring to mind. ;-) If you have many threads writing concurrently, BDB can be faster, but you have a great decrease in functionality as a cost. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berkeley_DB Here's one set of benchmarks. For low number of records, BDB was faster, for number of high records sqlite was faster. Both should be fast enough. You shouldn't need transactional capabilities where sqlite was the slowest. http://www.sqlite.org/cvstrac/wiki?p=KeyValueDatabase -- | Steven Pinkham, Security Consultant | | http://www.mavensecurity.com | | GPG public key ID CD31CAFB |
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb
_______________________________________________ W3af-develop mailing list W3af-develop@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/w3af-develop
