Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191]
	helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
	by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <gmaxwell@gmail.com>) id 1VLvCb-0000Ze-Aa
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Tue, 17 Sep 2013 13:20:25 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.215.42 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.215.42; envelope-from=gmaxwell@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-la0-f42.google.com; 
Received: from mail-la0-f42.google.com ([209.85.215.42])
	by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76) id 1VLvCW-0007zT-TB
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Tue, 17 Sep 2013 13:20:25 +0000
Received: by mail-la0-f42.google.com with SMTP id ep20so4427256lab.29
	for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
	Tue, 17 Sep 2013 06:20:13 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.112.0.242 with SMTP id 18mr29382272lbh.18.1379424013848;
	Tue, 17 Sep 2013 06:20:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.112.89.72 with HTTP; Tue, 17 Sep 2013 06:20:13 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CANEZrP1ksdGfB-282giysF-2Lo==NiD-nBdon5FJ9wLBLmX=TA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANEZrP1ksdGfB-282giysF-2Lo==NiD-nBdon5FJ9wLBLmX=TA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2013 06:20:13 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAS2fgSqnc_0mWFrt9TREhZzF+JGJZxs_XD_ht+6nngFE_oE3w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
To: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
	See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
	-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
	sender-domain
	0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
	(gmaxwell[at]gmail.com)
	-0.0 SPF_PASS               SPF: sender matches SPF record
	-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
	author's domain
	0.1 DKIM_SIGNED            Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
	not necessarily valid
	-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
X-Headers-End: 1VLvCW-0007zT-TB
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Faster databases than LevelDB
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2013 13:20:26 -0000

On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 4:00 AM, Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net> wrote:
> LevelDB is fast - very fast if you give it enough CPU time and disk seeks.
> But it's not the last word in performance.

I'd looked at the hyperleveldb, but their performance graphs made it
seem like it would be slower for the actual database sizes we're using
today.

Is there a competitor that specializes in being more robust to corruption? :(