From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1VLvCb-0000Ze-Aa for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 17 Sep 2013 13:20:25 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.215.42 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.215.42; envelope-from=gmaxwell@gmail.com; helo=mail-la0-f42.google.com; Received: from mail-la0-f42.google.com ([209.85.215.42]) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1VLvCW-0007zT-TB for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 17 Sep 2013 13:20:25 +0000 Received: by mail-la0-f42.google.com with SMTP id ep20so4427256lab.29 for ; Tue, 17 Sep 2013 06:20:13 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.0.242 with SMTP id 18mr29382272lbh.18.1379424013848; Tue, 17 Sep 2013 06:20:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.89.72 with HTTP; Tue, 17 Sep 2013 06:20:13 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2013 06:20:13 -0700 Message-ID: From: Gregory Maxwell To: Mike Hearn Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (gmaxwell[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature X-Headers-End: 1VLvCW-0007zT-TB Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Faster databases than LevelDB X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2013 13:20:26 -0000 On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 4:00 AM, Mike Hearn wrote: > LevelDB is fast - very fast if you give it enough CPU time and disk seeks. > But it's not the last word in performance. I'd looked at the hyperleveldb, but their performance graphs made it seem like it would be slower for the actual database sizes we're using today. Is there a competitor that specializes in being more robust to corruption? :(