The question is being removed.
I found out that the big difference is only for the HDD, but not for the SSD.
And the difference is very noticeable on long values (> 5000).
But I still did not find the conditions when the hash is better.
I will use only btree from now.
On Thu, 2 Jul 2020 00:00
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 8:07 PM Nick Kostirya via freebsd-stable
wrote:
>
> On Wed, 1 Jul 2020 18:20:19 +0800
> Li-Wen Hsu wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 6:07 PM Nick Kostirya via freebsd-stable
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello.
> > >
> > > I noticed that BerkeleyDB Hash is VERY slow compared to
On Wed, 1 Jul 2020 18:20:19 +0800
Li-Wen Hsu wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 6:07 PM Nick Kostirya via freebsd-stable
> wrote:
> >
> > Hello.
> >
> > I noticed that BerkeleyDB Hash is VERY slow compared to BerkeleyDB Btree on
> > FreeBSD (UFS or ZFS).
> > But they (Hash and Btree) have roughly
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 6:07 PM Nick Kostirya via freebsd-stable
wrote:
>
> Hello.
>
> I noticed that BerkeleyDB Hash is VERY slow compared to BerkeleyDB Btree on
> FreeBSD (UFS or ZFS).
> But they (Hash and Btree) have roughly the same performance on Linux.
>
> Why?
It's not an easy question, do
Hello.
I noticed that BerkeleyDB Hash is VERY slow compared to BerkeleyDB Btree on
FreeBSD (UFS or ZFS).
But they (Hash and Btree) have roughly the same performance on Linux.
Why?
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/ma
