Re: RFC: Constant Database Support

[Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg%britannica.bec.de@localhost>]

On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 02:56:33PM +1100, Simon Burge wrote:
> > It is not. DJB's cdb has a number of critical flaws. cdb itself is just
> > a very generic name... I don't care about the color much...
> 
> The color may not be important, but _please_ don't install a library
> called "cdb" in base when we have something in pkgsrc that has installed
> a library by the same name since 2001.

It won't be a separate library, that would defeat the purpose of
allowing libc to use it. At the moment I will likely go with cdbr_* and
cdbw_* for the functions and cdbr.h and cdbw.h for the headers, still
calling the format cdb though.

> > ... Creation time drops from 1.9s to 0.23s
> > on AMD64.
> 
> Do you have any info on lookup times?  This is for write-only read-many
> databases, so that would be a more important metric for me.

The trivial test case of a looking up a ${i}/udp for i=1..10001 for 100
times needs 1.2s for cdb and 1.3s user + 1.5s sys for db(3)
[services.db], but I haven't included the validation code in that yet.
E.g. the check that the record found is the record we are looking for.

Joerg