"Barry A. Warsaw" wrote: > > than the factor of 100 your numbers showed for you data! I would not > make the blanket assertion that Berkeley storage is 100 times slower > than FileStorage.
Sorry, let me clarify as well, I only meant in the context of searching and indexing... > Let me just reiterate: it's vitally important to tune your Berkeley > storage for your system and application, especially with regards to > cachesize. E.g. Getting the cachesize wrong can definitely destroy > your performance, maybe producing numbers as bad as you're seeing. > I won't claim that Berkeley DB is easy to tune, though. Indeed... and I've spent a while twiddling cache sizes to no avail ;-) cheers, Chris _______________________________________________ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )