On 8 Apr 2014, at 8:00pm, big stone <stonebi...@gmail.com> wrote: > I did experiment splitting my workload in 4 threads on my cpu i3-350m to > see what are the scaling possibilities. > > Timing : > 1 cpu = 28 seconds > 2 cpu = 16 seconds > 3 cpu = 15 seconds > 4 cpu = 14 seconds > > Analysis : > - sqlite is such a small foot-print in memory, it is really scaling well > with the number of cores, > > - hyper-threaded cores are useless for a database workload, > (it was the first time I had the opportunity to really use 4 cores, so > the first time I notice) > > - but the plumbery I personnaly need to manage threading out of sqlite > makes it not practical outside of a "test tube".
That's very interesting, Stone. I especially like your concluding sentence. Can I ask how big your database was and where your database was held ? Was it on a rotating disk, on a solid state disk, or in memory ? Simon. _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
