[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Your script requires 1002 separate ACID transactions. Each such
transaction should require at least 2 complete revolutions of your
disk drive platter - meaning that the minimum time to complete your
script should be 16 seconds.
The 2.4 kernel finished faster than this, which tells me that the
2.4 kernel probably does not implement the fsync() system call
correctly. I have heard reports of this but could not verify
it. What this means is that if you loose power unexpectedly,
the 2.4 kernel might corrupt your database. Probably since the
ReiserFS does a good job of journalling itself, you won't corrupt
the database, but your transactions will certainly not be Durable.
The 2.6 kernel is much slower because reiserFS is inefficient in
its implementation of fsync().
Thanks for the thorough explanation. I understand it better now.
You script does not measure how fast SQLite processes inserts. It
measure how fast it does transacxtions. If you put a BEGIN and
a COMMIT at the beginning and end of your script, I think you will
find that the whole thing will run in a fraction of a second under
either kernel.
Yeah, I have tried that, but my benchmarking is on individual
transactions instead of everything in one transaction.
Thanks for the great help!
--
D. Richard Hipp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cheers,
Phuah Yee Keat
