You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to derby-dev@db.apache.org by "Mike Matrigali (JIRA)" <de...@db.apache.org> on 2005/08/17 02:33:57 UTC
[jira] Updated: (DERBY-110) hsqldb is faster than derby doing inserts
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-110?page=all ]
Mike Matrigali updated DERBY-110:
---------------------------------
Component: Performance
Summary: hsqldb is faster than derby doing inserts (was: performance)
Description:
1. create db name systable in derby and hsqldb (another open source dbms);
2. create table named a table ('CREATE TABLE aTable(id INTEGER NOT NULL, name VARCHAR(255) NOT NULL, description VARCHAR(255))');
3. insert ten thousands row in table "atable"
for(int i=1; i<10000; i++) {
sql = "INSERT INTO aTable VALUES("+i+", 'haha', 'zhang'' test')";
stmt.execute(sql);
System.out.println(i);
}
4. derby spend 50390 millisecond;
hsqldb spend 4250 millisecond;
5. conclusion: hsqldb has more perfect performance.
Maybe derby need to improve it's performance.
was:
1. create db name systable in derby and hsqldb (another open source dbms);
2. create table named a table ('CREATE TABLE aTable(id INTEGER NOT NULL, name VARCHAR(255) NOT NULL, description VARCHAR(255))');
3. insert ten thousands row in table "atable"
for(int i=1; i<10000; i++) {
sql = "INSERT INTO aTable VALUES("+i+", 'haha', 'zhang'' test')";
stmt.execute(sql);
System.out.println(i);
}
4. derby spend 50390 millisecond;
hsqldb spend 4250 millisecond;
5. conclusion: hsqldb has more perfect performance.
Maybe derby need to improve it's performance.
Environment:
CPU 2.40GHz
windows 2000
was:
CPU 2.40GHz
windows 2000
> hsqldb is faster than derby doing inserts
> -----------------------------------------
>
> Key: DERBY-110
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-110
> Project: Derby
> Type: Test
> Components: Performance
> Versions: 10.0.2.1
> Environment: CPU 2.40GHz
> windows 2000
> Reporter: Zhang Jinsheng
> Priority: Minor
>
> 1. create db name systable in derby and hsqldb (another open source dbms);
> 2. create table named a table ('CREATE TABLE aTable(id INTEGER NOT NULL, name VARCHAR(255) NOT NULL, description VARCHAR(255))');
> 3. insert ten thousands row in table "atable"
> for(int i=1; i<10000; i++) {
> sql = "INSERT INTO aTable VALUES("+i+", 'haha', 'zhang'' test')";
> stmt.execute(sql);
> System.out.println(i);
> }
> 4. derby spend 50390 millisecond;
> hsqldb spend 4250 millisecond;
>
> 5. conclusion: hsqldb has more perfect performance.
> Maybe derby need to improve it's performance.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see:
http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira