Re: Event-based databases
- From: Doug McDonald <mcdonald@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 10:58:09 -0600
T.M. Sommers wrote:
which are variable length.
I would think that fixed-length fields in the files would improve performance:
Variable:
Read length of field
Read field
Fixed:
Read field
One read instead of two, no calculations, easy to jump to any row in the file, and so on.
Uh, no, in many cases. The first calculation is "is the data in the RAM-memory data cache, or do we need to go to disk to find it?". A smaller total database means that there is a
higher probability that you won't need to go to disk.
Without an in-RAM disk cache, and if the disk file system allows random disk seeks controlled by the program, then that is where the fixed length fields .. and thus locations in disk blocks ... speeds things up.
Doug McDonald
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Event-based databases
- From: T.M. Sommers
- Re: Event-based databases
- References:
- Event-based databases
- From: Steve Hayes
- Re: Event-based databases
- From: Lars Erik Bryld
- Re: Event-based databases
- From: Dennis K .
- Re: Event-based databases
- From: wim
- Re: Event-based databases
- From: Dennis K .
- Re: Event-based databases
- From: Doug McDonald
- Re: Event-based databases
- From: Leif B. Kristensen
- Re: Event-based databases
- From: Doug McDonald
- Re: Event-based databases
- From: T.M. Sommers
- Re: Event-based databases
- From: Doug McDonald
- Re: Event-based databases
- From: T.M. Sommers
- Event-based databases
- Prev by Date: Re: Event-based databases
- Next by Date: Re: Event-based databases
- Previous by thread: Re: Event-based databases
- Next by thread: Re: Event-based databases
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|