On 3 May 2012, at 10:30pm, Igor Tandetnik <itandet...@mvps.org> wrote:
> On 5/3/2012 5:04 PM, Marco Era wrote: >> Now that I have some time, I'm stress testing it to see how much I can get >> from it; what I want to check is its performance in a multithreading >> environment. >> >> To my surprise, it seems that serialized access to the database (which is >> the default in the source code for Windows) is ~20% faster than >> multithreading (no matter how the shared cache option is set). > > Multithreading helps CPU-bound applications improve performance by taking > advantage of multiple cores. But SQLite is I/O-bound most of the time. Your > hard drive only has one set of heads: trying to pull them in four directions > at once just leads to excessive seek activity, hurting performance. If you have one available, you might try the same test with a computer which has a solid state drive (SSD) instead of a rotating drive. Your bottleneck is still the drive itself, but you no longer spend most of your time waiting for the disk to rotate to the right place to read/write the sector you want. It's this 'rotational latency' which kills conventional hard disk speed. I'd be interested in seeing results from anyone who could run such a comparison. Simon. _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
