Hi Calum I am very interested in using both your RML and persist library (especially RML with persist) to avoid sql db altogether! Some questions I have for persist: - Your benchmark was for 0.9 release on 2.4 kernel. What happens on 0.95 and 2.6 kernel ? - The 1 million row limitation looks awfully low to me. Is the code 64-bit ready ? If not, do you have any plans for x86_64 ? - This seems a core library that boost should have. Do you plan to submit it ? Jose On 9/29/05, Calum Grant <calum@visula.org> wrote:
[mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Andreas Pokorny On Wed, Sep 28, 2005 at 10:50:51PM +0100, Calum Grant <calum@visula.org> wrote:
[mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Andreas Pokorny On Tue, Sep 27, 2005 at 09:24:24PM +0100, Calum Grant <calum@visula.org> wrote:
Is there any interest in providing relational containers in Boost? Are there any features/improvements you can suggest for RML?
You could compare the library with sqlite.
Completely different. Most database engines are controlled via text strings, and require parsing and data transformation. This cuts all that out using C++ templates, and is therefore way faster. It's a container.
Oh, sorry my request was not formulated clearly enough. I wanted to see how rml performs compared to sqlite in a benchmark. Sqlite is currently a nice and fast solution if you do not need a remote database. Rml could be an even better solution, if you do not require a text sql interface, provided that there are table types available in rml, which work without being fully loaded to memory.
Furthermore you could implement a table that can be stored in a file, and used wihout reading all records into memory.
I think the memory-mapped file route would be the most profitable, it would probably already work.
Interesting, could you give a short overview, how it could already work.
You could use an allocator with RML (or indeed any STL container) that stores the data in a memory-mapped file. This basically makes the data persistent.
I actually had a project a while back that did such a thing, and got some good benchmarks comparing MySQL vs file-mapped containers: http://lightwave.visula.org/persist/bench.html and I'm sure boost::shmem::allocator is similar. Performance is very good. We could devise a benchmark and I'll implement in RML + Persist/Shmem, you implement in SQLlite and we'll see the difference.
Calum
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost