Zeugswetter Andreas SB wrote:
>
> > Frankly, based on my experience with Berkeley DB, I'd bet on mine.
> > I can do 2300 tuple fetches per CPU per second, with linear scale-
> > up to at least four processors (that's what we had on the box we
> > used). That's 9200 fetches a second. Performance isn't going
> > to be the deciding issue.
>
> Wow, that sounds darn slow. Speed of a seq scan on one CPU,
> one disk should give you more like 19000 rows/s with a small record size.
> Of course you are probably talking about random fetch order here,
> but we need fast seq scans too.
Could someone test this on MySQL with bsddb storage that should be out
by now ?
Could be quite indicative of what we an expect.
> (10 Mb/s disk, 111 b/row, no cpu bottleneck, nothing cached ,
> Informix db, select count(*) ... where notindexedfield != 'notpresentvalue';
> Table pages interleaved with index pages, tabsize 337 Mb
> (table with lots of insert + update + delete history) )
>
> Andreas