Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1VLtik-0006oM-A1 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 17 Sep 2013 11:45:30 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.214.43 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.214.43; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com; helo=mail-bk0-f43.google.com; Received: from mail-bk0-f43.google.com ([209.85.214.43]) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1VLtif-0002GS-SL for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 17 Sep 2013 11:45:30 +0000 Received: by mail-bk0-f43.google.com with SMTP id mz13so2085360bkb.16 for ; Tue, 17 Sep 2013 04:45:19 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.204.226.135 with SMTP id iw7mr29111880bkb.4.1379418318988; Tue, 17 Sep 2013 04:45:18 -0700 (PDT) Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com Received: by 10.204.72.69 with HTTP; Tue, 17 Sep 2013 04:45:18 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2013 13:45:18 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: r3t3HU-DYj49PbBz4EmAanHU3Sg Message-ID: From: Mike Hearn To: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=485b3970d514e6ac1404e692daa2 X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) 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 (mh.in.england[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 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: 1VLtif-0002GS-SL Cc: Bitcoin Dev 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: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2013 11:45:30 -0000 --485b3970d514e6ac1404e692daa2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Nobody has written code to use a better format, migrate old wallets, etc. On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 1:41 PM, Jorge Tim=C3=B3n wrot= e: > 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 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 grain= ed > > 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 ta= ke > > 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 benchmark= s > it > > completely smokes LevelDB. I have not explored how it does this or trie= d > 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 > say > > 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 > the > > most interesting for us because that's what UTXO lookups involve. > > > > They also compare against HyperLevelDB, where the differences are much > less > > pronounced and actually HyperLevelDB appears to be able to do random > writes > > faster than Sophia. > > > > > -- > Jorge Tim=C3=B3n > > http://freico.in/ > --485b3970d514e6ac1404e692daa2 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Nobody has written code to use a better format, migrate ol= d wallets, etc.


On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 1:41 PM, Jorge Tim=C3=B3n <jtimon@monetiz= e.io> wrote:
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.n= et> wrote:
> LevelDB is fast - very fast if you give it enough CPU time and disk se= eks.
> But it's not the last word in performance.
>
> HyperLevelDB is a forked LevelDB with some changes, mostly, finer grai= ned
> 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 t= ake
> 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 benchmar= ks it
> completely smokes LevelDB. I have not explored how it does this or tri= ed 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= say
> 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= the
> most interesting for us because that's what UTXO lookups involve.<= br> >
> They also compare against HyperLevelDB, where the differences are much= less
> pronounced and actually HyperLevelDB appears to be able to do random w= rites
> faster than Sophia.
>


--
Jorge Tim=C3=B3n

http://freico.in/

--485b3970d514e6ac1404e692daa2--