Re: images in database... a suggestion
Re: images in database... a suggestion
- Subject: Re: images in database... a suggestion
- From: Micky Holdorf <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 13:50:07 +0100
Hi,
Do anyone have similar tests with OpenBase?
What are the experiences?
/Micky Holdorf
On 13/12/2005, at 9.20, Georg Tuparev wrote:
Dave,
In the past we did extensive comparison of several databases for
two projects - one similar to Alex' and the other is an
astronomical database - a combination of many and large images and
really astronomical amounts of coordinates and other catalogue data.
According to my notes, the speed of MySQL start degrading by about
30-40GB load. The number of records did not worsen the situation
for simple (one table) fetches, but joins start getting slower. I
do not remember the number of records though. At about 100GB MySQL
was dead.
In contrast FrontBase was not shining up until 40-50GB when it
start getting the bests marks. We stopped our loads at 1.7TB. At
that stage only FrontBase and Oracle were working normally and
PostgresSQL was struggling (later version of it work much better,
but we never tested them extensively). With 1.7 TB and 470M records
in the most populated table (about 300 tables in total) FrontBase
was doing on average 30% better then Oracle.
If you count price, support, and maintainability, FB is probably
two orders of magnitude better then Oracle. I believe only the
current version of PosSQL should be considered seriously ... but
the support FB gives outweighs the small price we have to pay for it.
gt
On Dec 13, 2005, at 1:22 AM, David Holt wrote:
Georg,
When you say that MySQL does not scale, at what point did you see
performance start to degrade? Was the degradation a function of
the size of the images, size of the database, the number of
images, or number of transactions? I have seen some degradation
because of the application memory requirements to stream out of
the database (when handling images with a filesize greater about
15 Mb), but I don't think it was because of problems with the
database itself. What does Frontbase do differently?
Thanks,
David
On 12 Dec 2005, at 4:06 PM, Georg Tuparev wrote:
Alex,
Based on my experience in the exact same type of project, I would
strongly discourage you storing images in MySQL. If you decide to
use FrontBase though, it should work fine if you use separate
schemas and raw devices... or possibly without them too. MySQL
just does not scale...
Georg Tuparev
Tuparev Technologies
Klipper 13
1186 VR Amstelveen
The Netherlands
Mobile: +31-6-55798196
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden