--On Monday, January 27, 2014 8:50 AM +0100 Ulrich Windl Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de wrote:
"Markus Doppelbauer" doppelbauer@gmx.net schrieb am 25.01.2014 um 16:04 in
Nachricht <trinity-2ed9e021-7691-4933-90cc-5ecf9e3509d0-1390662285748@3capp-gmx-bs0 7>:
Hello,
We are using BerkeleyDB since a decade - but we are searching for something more lightweight. LMDB is what we are looking for ... ^^
??? More lightweight? Last time I used Sleepycat DB, the extra size for the binary was about 1MB...
The overhead being discussed is not the size of the binary, but the "heavy" weight of the BDB code (locks, etc) that one has to deal with with BDB databases. If you paid much attention to the list and published benchmarks, however, you'd actually already be aware of this. BDB imposes a substantial overhead penalty compared to LMDB.
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount Architect - Server Zimbra, Inc. -------------------- Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration