[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Chronological]
[Thread]
[Top]
Re: [LMDB] Large transactions
- To: Jürgen Baier <baier@semedy.com>, openldap-technical@openldap.org
- Subject: Re: [LMDB] Large transactions
- From: Howard Chu <hyc@symas.com>
- Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2017 20:17:19 +0000
- In-reply-to: <WM!354c5fbb04a8692d321d46697249756ed1ce65dc4cdbf592366138261b88ed7902879da025f923c184d6c4eb02473dc9!@mailstronghold-2.zmailcloud.com>
- References: <555c7e78-a5e4-23ee-5b5c-2720b54e69e4@semedy.com> <WM!354c5fbb04a8692d321d46697249756ed1ce65dc4cdbf592366138261b88ed7902879da025f923c184d6c4eb02473dc9!@mailstronghold-2.zmailcloud.com>
- User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:56.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/56.0 SeaMonkey/2.53a1
Jürgen Baier wrote:
Hi,
I have a question about LMDB (I hope this is the right mailing list for such a
question).
I'm running a benchmark (which is similar to my intended use case) which does
not behave as I hoped. I store 1 billion key/value pairs in a single LMDB
database. _In a single transaction._ The keys are MD5 hash codes from random
data (16 bytes) and the value is the string "test".
The documentation about mdb_page_spill says (as far as I understand) that this
function is called to prevent MDB_TXN_FULL situations. Does this mean that my
transaction is simply too large to be handled efficiently by LMDB?
Yes.
--
-- Howard Chu
CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com
Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/
Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/