How InnoDB lost its advantage

http://dom.as/2015/04/09/how-innodb-lost-its-advantage/

by jaytaylor • 11 years ago

69 15 11 years ago

dom.as

eisvogel• 11 years ago

Why is there an apostrophe in "its"?

malkia• 11 years ago

Error in decompression I guess.

kbenson• 11 years ago

There's not supposed to be one. It makes no sense to say "How InnoDB lost it is advantage" so it's not supposed to have an apostrophe. It took me decades to internalize that rule, and even now, I accidentally do the wrong thing.

http://public.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/its.html

whoopdedo• 11 years ago

Bob's Quick Guide to the Apostrophe

http://www.angryflower.com/aposter.html

ams6110• 11 years ago

Queue my tenth grade English teacher: "It's a wise dog that scratches its own fleas."

juliangregorian4• 11 years ago

Seems like for whatever reason RocksDB has decided to shit all over MySQL and Mongo lately, which is an interesting strategy because they are both capable of using RocksDB storage engines.

http://objectrocket.com/blog/how-to/experimental-pluggable-s... https://github.com/MySQLOnRocksDB/mysql-5.6/

Also interesting is that Mongo has just moved to WiredTiger storage engine, which is beating RocksDB in benchmarks.

http://symas.com/mdb/inmem/

Titanous• 11 years ago

Facebook makes RocksDB. The MySQL forked you linked is maintained by Facebook. The blog post is from a Facebook engineer who works on MySQL at Facebook. The tweet linked in the blog post is from a Parse engineer talking about using MongoDB with a RocksDB storage backend. Parse is a Facebook product.

I don't see how any of that is attacking MySQL or MongoDB, just their stock storage engines.

juliangregorian4• 11 years ago

Yes, should say Facebook makes RocksDB. So Facebook engineer points out how shit InnoDB has become and how RocksDB is gonna eat its lunch. Facebook/Parse engineer is called in to hoot about space utilisation, which is suspect as no info given as to how much data was duplicated on the Mongo replica set, but safe to assume it was at least 3 times. Which means RocksDB was 2.6x more space-efficient. Okay, but if the Mongo replica set had 5 members RocksDB is only 1.5x more space-efficient. Mongo doesn't really optimize for space efficiency, because updates are ideally done in place and documents are normally padded to make that easier. On the other hand RocksDB is aggressively optimizing for space usage, as well as this particular case being a fresh import (no fragmentation). So it really doesn't make a whole lot of sense to crow about it, especially since it comes with a loss of redundancy.

I'd say some shit has been cast.

PhantomGremlin• 11 years ago

I don't understand the nuances and fighting over what database is better.

So the key takeaway for me is the reminder that persistent storage is generally no longer spinning rust. Programs and operating systems should evolve to take advantage of the different strengths and weaknesses of flash based storage.

How InnoDB lost its advantage

Related Stories