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

Re: Justification for BDB vs RDBMS

On Wednesday 02 Mar 2005 23:59, you wrote:
> Gavin Henry wrote:
> >Dear all,
> >
> >If you have a friend who is a highly skilled Oracle DBA with 20+ years
> >experience, how do you convince them that bdb is a better backend choice
> > than back-sql?
> >
> >My argument was that bdb is extremely optimised for high read access.
> There's a much simpler argument. BerkeleyDB is inherently more efficient
> than any SQL database because it is a lower-level piece of code. The
> fact that MySQL is implemented on top of BerkeleyDB illustrates this
> clearly. Why go through all of the intermediate layers that MySQL
> comprises to get to the DB, when we can use BDB directly...
> Nobody uses back-sql for performance, they use it because they have a
> bunch of data already existing in an RDBMS and it is politically
> infeasible to migrate to something else, i.e., they have no choice. When
> you have the freedom to choose the best solution, you go with back-bdb.
>  -- Howard Chu
> Chief Architect, Symas Corp.       Director, Highland Sun
>  http://www.symas.com               http://highlandsun.com/hyc
>  Symas: Premier OpenSource Development and Support

Thank you Howard, I knew you would answer ;-)

Kind Regards,

Gavin Henry.
Managing Director.

T +44 (0) 1224 279484
M +44 (0) 7930 323266
F +44 (0) 1224 742001
E ghenry@suretecsystems.com

Open Source. Open Solutions(tm).


Attachment: pgp5PejXtKLmf.pgp
Description: PGP signature