On 5/31/12 5:47 PM, "Richard Gaskin" <ambassa...@fourthworld.com> wrote:
Hi Richard,
>> The sql statements were not that complex, just a LOT of toing and froing
>> between LC and the db. I soon abandoned SQLite as it was clear that
>> Valentina was getting the answers quicker.
>
> Ruslan's genius is noteworthy, but perhaps the smartest decision he made
> with Valentina was to design it using a columnar data store.
Very wrong actually :-)
* Valentina is fast not only because of vertical format.
we use for example not B-tree indexes but others.
* We are proud NOT by vertical format, although we was may be one of the
first in the world, that's right.
We ARE proud by Valentina Database Model - which we position as
Object Relational Model
* I have start develop Valentina in 1993 NOT because I was going make
super-fast db, or columnar db. No !! :)
REASON was -- because I have learn in that years OO-programming,
and c++, and I have start work with dbs, and I was shocked by
stupid state of things with relational model ...
which still exists, 20 years later ...
So I have start develop new db engine, which KNOWs and UNDERSTAND
something more than just tables and fields.
* Idea of columnar format have come to mind about 3-4 years later,
And reason was NOT speed as many think. :-)
REASON of columnar format was idea how **Table Inheritance** must look.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
* And yes, we still have not implement inheritance :-(((
btw, all other attempts to make inheritance for DBs,
which I have see are wrong (from my point of view).
> Columnar stores are radically different from row-based stores, such as
> most SQL-based implementations use. For the relatively low cost of some
> additional overhead in updates, columnar stores allow optimized searches
> in ways that row-based system can rarely match.
> This page provides a good intro to the differences:
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Column-oriented_DBMS#Benefits>
This is only may be HALF of truth :-)
Remember my words about {INHERITANCE + COLUMN-format}
Future you will see why this is so important ...
> Additionally, the structure of an SQLite DB, particularly the indexing,
> can radically improve performance.
Not very right.
Any db have indexing. And relational, and navigational, and columnar.
Nobody searches db without indexing :-)
But if compare to Valentina this point ...
except indexes each db have one more HARD operation -- joins ...
Here play PK, FK keys, their indexes, and so on ...
Valentina can win here cool also ...
> While it's unlikely that it could be
> optimized to beat Valentina, there may be opportunities to speed up the
> SQLite DB to be at least closer to it.
No ...
Of course depends on queries ... But
If table weights e.g. 2 GB ...
For some operations a row-based DB NEED to load that 2GB
at HDD speed 40Mb you get 50 seconds ...
For column db you may be lucky to load only e.g. 20-100Mb
So speed ONLY because of this can be 50-100 times faster.
But exists other factors also, which multiply each other at last of end ...
--
Best regards,
Ruslan Zasukhin
VP Engineering and New Technology
Paradigma Software, Inc
Valentina - Joining Worlds of Information
http://www.paradigmasoft.com
[I feel the need: the need for speed]
_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
