Make your own free website on Tripod.com

InstantDB Project
About InstantDB
Project Mail Lists
Short History
Reporting Bugs
Screen Shots
3rd Party Examples
FAQs

Software
Downloads
Documentation
CVS Repositories
Roadmap
License

About Enhydra.org
Who We Are
News, Articles & Events
Getting Involved
Contact Us

Community
Demos
Contributions
Resources
Case Studies
On The Edge! -NEW-
Commercial Vendors


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: InstantDB: Ineffective storage


Darius

You're quite right in that InstantDB *does* use up more disk space than 
most people anticipate. This is usually simply due to strings being 
encoded as fixed length Unicode strings. The default is to go for 
maximum flexibility. However there are several techniques that can be 
used to reduce storage requirements where this is a problem.

Objects get serialized in the usual way, so I'm puzzled as to why 
they're taking up so much extra space in this case. If you could 
forward some code and data to me (use peter.hearty@lutris.com - no need 
to fill up everyone's mailboxes) then I could have a look to see why 
this example is taking up so much space.

Regards

Pete

----- Original Message -----
From: Darius Silingas <dariuss@nomagiclt.com>
Date: Friday, February 2, 2001 4:51 pm
Subject: InstantDB: Ineffective storage

> Hi,
> 
> My first impression about InstantDB is that it's storage is very very
> ineffective :(
> As far as I am making research on pure Java DBMS products I wrote a
> simple framework for testing compliance with JDBC/SQL, support for
> referential integrity and transactions, performance, storage 
> efficiency,security and other features. So I tried to store 10000 
> objects to
> InstantDB database. Each of the objects contained 1 long, 2 
> Strings, 1
> int, 1 float, array of
> longs with average size of 3 and one serializable Java object that
> contained 2 Strings and one more Serializable objects with 7 Strings
> inside. I was really supprised that after a long waiting system 
> issued a
> message that there is not enough space on disk :) I tried with 100
> objects then and it succeeded but lasted couple of seconds (which is
> very very long time) and took ~25MB of disk space. I serialized these
> 100 objects to file and it took just some milliseconds and 18KB :) 
> Well,database of course should be larger but not more than 1000 
> times. Even
> Hypersonic SQL storing everything in simple plain text scripts 
> took much
> less space... I'm getting disappointed with all these freeware and 
> opensource products. I think I better look for some low-cost 
> commertialproducts.
> 
> DOES ANY ONE KNOW ANY BUYER'S GUIDE OR COMPARISION FOR PURE JAVA DBMS?
> 
> --
> Darius Silingas
> Programmer
> No Magic
> E-mail: dariuss@nomagiclt.com
> Phone: +370 86 12748
> WWW: http://www.nomagic.com
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to 
> majordomo@enhydra.orgwith the text "unsubscribe instantdb" in the 
> body of the email.
> If you have other questions regarding this mailing list, send 
> email to
> the list admin at owner-instantdb@enhydra.org.
> 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to majordomo@enhydra.org
with the text "unsubscribe instantdb" in the body of the email.
If you have other questions regarding this mailing list, send email to
the list admin at owner-instantdb@enhydra.org.