From: | "Diego Schulz" <dschulz(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Using Postgres to store high volume streams of sensor readings |
Date: | 2008-11-21 20:26:02 |
Message-ID: | 47dcfe400811211226u625e96e7hd9694ef73d5aa612@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 9:50 AM, Ciprian Dorin Craciun <
ciprian(dot)craciun(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Currently I'm benchmarking the following storage solutions for this:
> * Hypertable (http://www.hypertable.org/) -- which has good insert
> rate (about 250k inserts / s), but slow read rate (about 150k reads /
> s); (the aggregates are manually computed, as Hypertable does not
> support other queries except scanning (in fact min, and max are easy
> beeing the first / last key in the ordered set, but avg must be done
> by sequential scan);)
> * BerkeleyDB -- quite Ok insert rate (about 50k inserts / s), but
> fabulos read rate (about 2M reads / s); (the same issue with
> aggregates;)
> * Postgres -- which behaves quite poorly (see below)...
> * MySQL -- next to be tested;
>
I think it'll be also interesting to see how SQLite 3 performs in this
scenario. Any plans?
regards
diego
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2008-11-21 20:44:39 | Re: Postgres mail list traffic over time |
Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2008-11-21 20:22:11 | Re: compiling libpq.dll with Borland C++, is it possible? |