Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-couchdb-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 29087 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2010 04:15:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 21 Dec 2010 04:15:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 77202 invoked by uid 500); 21 Dec 2010 04:15:11 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-couchdb-user-archive@couchdb.apache.org Received: (qmail 77001 invoked by uid 500); 21 Dec 2010 04:15:10 -0000 Mailing-List: contact user-help@couchdb.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: user@couchdb.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list user@couchdb.apache.org Received: (qmail 76993 invoked by uid 99); 21 Dec 2010 04:15:09 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 21 Dec 2010 04:15:09 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of anandology@gmail.com designates 209.85.161.54 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.161.54] (HELO mail-fx0-f54.google.com) (209.85.161.54) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 21 Dec 2010 04:15:02 +0000 Received: by fxm16 with SMTP id 16so3768392fxm.27 for ; Mon, 20 Dec 2010 20:14:41 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:mime-version:received:in-reply-to :references:from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type; bh=aMBIzr/R8EQSF0xVrdFc9S/dn5vLiYgslPpEdPCS1Y8=; b=LRYpuHP6exePGa8gMywHMpUu1fA7ZG4lcUeIJbi5/He7VVHYk7k9irtkAUKFqfLGFt C67EhSDc7fKiF62/2/a1WUavPKI/2dZqHfvukYSCOf7heXOCJ+rAylmEX3vYRzM3QA8j SvonRQYT4raJmywDiQzlnxPObRDN60nks1Z7k= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; b=E3ZXQAP95ufai/UBbx2GGAeVPdx3Hy2UwknHRduc/vl3o3ciRMZSNN/bE1TE/gZrmu cq0CRxD6g7fxLmaNOdGXqzlM3o8PzYEb/8WBuYuOq31qhvxp38JZRcTtuGSSEwK9/TXt bpakkzt4qD2M243W1BBm5NUwKjoT/9bzUjr4I= Received: by 10.223.93.140 with SMTP id v12mr4631336fam.96.1292904881548; Mon, 20 Dec 2010 20:14:41 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.86.193 with HTTP; Mon, 20 Dec 2010 20:14:21 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <06808805-9086-4677-8B2D-C12B63CFE620@gmail.com> <1405CBE3-CD49-4C70-B64C-145E198B99B0@apache.org> <76CBEBC6-1B90-46E4-9A83-CD5C3A149D31@apache.org> From: Anand Chitipothu Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 09:44:21 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Comparison of MongoDB & CouchDB: MongoDB seems better on insert To: user@couchdb.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org > [...] > Generally the question that tends to matter is: Can view generation > keep up with inserts, on average? Once the index is built, responses > to it are fast, so the index build time matters. On desktop-class > hardware, I tend to expect between 500-1000 documents per second can > be processed (for documents about as complex and large as a tweet). Of > course this # will vary widely depending on hardware and the # of keys > you emit. >[...] In my experience, I've seen that view generation starts with a speed of 1000 docs/secs and drops to less than 50 docs/sec as the size of view file increases. Anand