http://monogroncho.com/2008/11/very-simple-benchmarking/ Just a collection of random stuff Fri, 30 Jul 2010 10:21:11 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 http://monogroncho.com/2008/11/very-simple-benchmarking/#comment-10 Ulises Sun, 07 Dec 2008 19:41:44 +0000 http://monogroncho.com/?p=185#comment-10 @Chris I haven't tested GETting a view without the reduce part but will do so. As soon as I do it I will report the numbers here. One thing I did notice was that CouchDB was launching a new couchjs process per request and that seemed a tad excessive. Perhaps is as you comment the fact that I was testing views with the reduce, I don't know really. @Chris I haven’t tested GETting a view without the reduce part but will do so. As soon as I do it I will report the numbers here. One thing I did notice was that CouchDB was launching a new couchjs process per request and that seemed a tad excessive. Perhaps is as you comment the fact that I was testing views with the reduce, I don’t know really.

]]> http://monogroncho.com/2008/11/very-simple-benchmarking/#comment-9 Chris Anderson Sun, 07 Dec 2008 16:59:42 +0000 http://monogroncho.com/?p=185#comment-9 Good work benchmarking. The first set (doc requests) seems to be about what I was getting, and the reduce view times seem about what I'd expect them to be. I'd be interested to see what the timing is like for view without reduce. Reduce will be slower than Map, because it always uses 1 couchjs process. Map on the other hand should be nearly pure IO. Good work benchmarking. The first set (doc requests) seems to be about what I was getting, and the reduce view times seem about what I’d expect them to be. I’d be interested to see what the timing is like for view without reduce. Reduce will be slower than Map, because it always uses 1 couchjs process. Map on the other hand should be nearly pure IO.

]]>