[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

RE: Questions...

Load times for 1 million entries with "index objectclass,cn eq", and
execution times for test008 on these databases:

2.0 ldbm
611.460u 106.700s 13:36.75 87.9%        0+0k 0+0io 24570pf+0w
real    8m20.289s

2.1 ldbm
577.350u 111.690s 13:33.08 84.7%        0+0k 0+0io 24597pf+0w
real    8m54.929s

2.2 ldbm
615.970u 113.240s 14:09.51 85.8%        0+0k 0+0io 24636pf+0w
real    8m59.085s

2.1 bdb
1305.960u 25.130s 25:38.20 86.5%        0+0k 0+0io 193749pf+0w
real    0m23.964s

2.2 bdb
1350.630u 28.200s 26:37.10 86.3%        0+0k 0+0io 204497pf+0w
real    0m10.335s

2.2 hdb
1107.680u 22.890s 21:57.24 85.8%        0+0k 0+0io 185340pf+0w
real    0m9.704s

The BDB/HDB tests were timed with transaction logging turned off.

To recap the test008 scenario - 5 clients performing 1000 reads of a single
entry, 5 clients performing 500 searches for a single entry, 4 clients
adding/deleting an entry (50 times) and 4 clients executing modrdn on an
entry (50 times). The load times for BDB/HDB can be further improved by using
more memory, but my test machine has only 768MB, and 384MB seemed like a
reasonable limit in this situation.

Note that the fastest ldbm run time (8m20s) is over 200 times slower than the
slowest bdb run time (0m24s), and back-hdb is about 500 times faster than the
fastest ldbm.

  -- Howard Chu
  Chief Architect, Symas Corp.       Director, Highland Sun
  http://www.symas.com               http://highlandsun.com/hyc
  Symas: Premier OpenSource Development and Support