1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
|
Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <jtimon@monetize.io>) id 1VLtk7-0004I7-3r
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 17 Sep 2013 11:46:55 +0000
Received: from mail-lb0-f174.google.com ([209.85.217.174])
by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1VLtk3-0007Bk-Mu
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 17 Sep 2013 11:46:55 +0000
Received: by mail-lb0-f174.google.com with SMTP id w6so5238782lbh.33
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Tue, 17 Sep 2013 04:46:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date
:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type
:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=fpd4ckJ+Tsfd+rMNqfyXqYLnRU2ljur9CZ9qWFJB5WM=;
b=W1AWW1KosxwDZaf7SMbycl4LFGVT4cmkPOY5T22YoECtyUnzJGlc3XryPAS7C3tg2v
iCRqbHTd0nTsy/ky+0ojMYy57fsJEAjpI8qmc7jVvSOXpG5UgjXYaLfuf+Eq9Wg6HcRD
MPKYoB3O1jmi5FCU5yO9QXSCcdU8gZhoDyEeDyYvC6W6IP1+9CxxN4cxzbPLWDN6even
2CUQ5gs6zwU27r3rKqFlD8ksSeqzSxN3QYpabTeBQo0XFvIpL3CAie6nvtQ+mkAZaDtO
TuHcLve9GDoL0kiMtt3rtlY1ugS1CCgB4kwus1o35oZ4Ey1vDALhCZ/aO4hrN2XAQSGg
WeAg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmFZVlVdaGb1CDV6eQGWh6zoOYO/uHQeP2wm2HiC48w9vrjpaLKrdFfmMKcq+Bloz408j65
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.112.29.17 with SMTP id f17mr882230lbh.45.1379418090116; Tue,
17 Sep 2013 04:41:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.112.40.15 with HTTP; Tue, 17 Sep 2013 04:41:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Originating-IP: [85.53.133.29]
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 13:41:30 +0200
Message-ID: <CAC1+kJO8KX6uc7jEz9Otv+BbrJQUk6RvbiyWnP0m=Voh8zdcWQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Tim=F3n?= <jtimon@monetize.io>
To: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
X-Headers-End: 1VLtk3-0007Bk-Mu
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 11:46:55 -0000
Only slightly related to this...
What's the reason why BerkleyDB is maintained for the wallet?
I think it would be a good thing to get rid of the libdb4.8++-dev
dependency that makes bitcoind harder to compile on debian and ubuntu.
Unless, of course, there's a reason I am missing...
On 9/17/13, 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.
>
> HyperLevelDB is a forked LevelDB with some changes, mostly, finer grained
> locking and changes to how compaction works:
>
> http://hyperdex.org/performance/leveldb/
>
> However, it comes with a caveat - one of the changes they made is to take
> away write throttling if compaction falls behind, the app itself is
> expected to do that.
>
> Sophia is a competitor to LevelDB. The website claims that in benchmarks =
it
> completely smokes LevelDB. I have not explored how it does this or tried =
to
> replicate their benchmarks myself:
>
> http://sphia.org/index.html
> http://sphia.org/benchmarks.html
>
> It's written in C and BSD licensed.
>
> As an example of the kind of speedup they claim to be capable of, they sa=
y
> LevelDB could do 167,476 random reads per second on their SSD based
> machine. Sophia could do 438,084 reads/sec. Random reads are of course th=
e
> most interesting for us because that's what UTXO lookups involve.
>
> They also compare against HyperLevelDB, where the differences are much le=
ss
> pronounced and actually HyperLevelDB appears to be able to do random writ=
es
> faster than Sophia.
>
--=20
Jorge Tim=F3n
http://freico.in/
|
