Re: [WebDNA] [store] and [recall]: default db location

This WebDNA talk-list message is from

2015

It keeps the original formatting. numero = 112074
interpreted = N
texte = > Why would it matter if the same volume of data were stored in a> single db or in separate dbs?Just want to take this opportunity to make a parenthesis: several small =databases are usually faster than a large one. Why is this? because one =single modification in a database, in case "Automatically commit =databases to disk after modification" is checked, will have to write few =hundred KB or few MB instead of tens or hundreds of MB to disk. Also, =smaller databases use smaller chunks of RAM.For a instance, a *very* large database with millions of entries would =be faster if split, using a small switch as entry point. For instance =let say the database stores names. It is divided into 26 smaller db, =each one storing the names starting with a specific letter: "a", "b", ="c", "d", =85The entry point (search, append, whatever=85) will extract the first =letter of the query and point the query at the proper db.Since we can expect that not all the databases will be opened at the =same time, RAM usage will also be lower, and a very large database =(several GB) will be easier to open if the server does not have a lot of =RAM.- chris= Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:

Re: [WebDNA] [store] and [recall]: default db location (WebDNA TPP 2015)
Re: [WebDNA] [store] and [recall]: default db location (Terry Wilson 2015)
Re: [WebDNA] [store] and [recall]: default db location (Donovan Brooke 2015)
Re: [WebDNA] [store] and [recall]: default db location (Donovan Brooke 2015)
Re: [WebDNA] [store] and [recall]: default db location (Donovan Brooke 2015)
Re: [WebDNA] [store] and [recall]: default db location (christophe.billiottet@webdna.us 2015)
Re: [WebDNA] [store] and [recall]: default db location (Kenneth Grome 2015)
Re: [WebDNA] [store] and [recall]: default db location (christophe.billiottet@webdna.us 2015)
[WebDNA] [store] and [recall]: default db location (Kenneth Grome 2015)

> Why would it matter if the same volume of data were stored in a> single db or in separate dbs?Just want to take this opportunity to make a parenthesis: several small =databases are usually faster than a large one. Why is this? because one =single modification in a database, in case "Automatically commit =databases to disk after modification" is checked, will have to write few =hundred KB or few MB instead of tens or hundreds of MB to disk. Also, =smaller databases use smaller chunks of RAM.For a instance, a *very* large database with millions of entries would =be faster if split, using a small switch as entry point. For instance =let say the database stores names. It is divided into 26 smaller db, =each one storing the names starting with a specific letter: "a", "b", ="c", "d", =85The entry point (search, append, whatever=85) will extract the first =letter of the query and point the query at the proper db.Since we can expect that not all the databases will be opened at the =same time, RAM usage will also be lower, and a very large database =(several GB) will be easier to open if the server does not have a lot of =RAM.- chris= christophe.billiottet@webdna.us

DOWNLOAD WEBDNA NOW!

Re: [WebDNA] [store] and [recall]: default db location

2015

Top Articles:

Related Readings: