Re^2: learning memcached

in reply to Re: learning memcached
in thread learning memcached

> I think you benchmark is flawed. You say you have 20_000 random 
> entries, but you only make 2723 queries.

How did you determine that I made only 2723 queries? The benchmark shows that I made 40_000 queries for each code fragment at a rate of 2723 queries per second with the memcache process and 3846 queries per second with the straight-from-db process. Or, am I reading the results wrong?

Update: Here is another measurement, this time using timethese. The results are the same as before.

 query_dbh: 24 wallclock secs ( 5.28 usr +  5.29 sys = 10.57 CPU) @ 37
+84.30/s (n=40000)
 query_mem: 70 wallclock secs ( 7.80 usr +  6.08 sys = 13.88 CPU) @ 28
+81.84/s (n=40000)
[download]

Whatever I am doing, it is far faster to open up the SQLite database every time and query it than it is to query the memory cached value. (I am creating a $dbh and $sth every time, and also opening a file and writing to it every time to kinda emulate a CGI process that starts afresh on every hit of the browser.

when small people start casting long shadows, it is time to go to bed

Comment on Re^2: learning memcached Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: learning memcached by Anonymous Monk on May 21, 2011 at 03:04 UTC
Or, am I reading the results wrong? You're not reading the results wrong, I obviously missed the count :) Another (insert better word here) "flaw" , is your sql query is too simple :) The way I understand memcached, you get benefit if you cache data which is expensive to calculate	[reply]
Re^4: learning memcached by punkish (Priest) on May 21, 2011 at 03:10 UTC
> Another (insert better word here) "flaw" , is your sql query is too simple :) > The way I understand memcached, you get benefit if you cache data which is > expensive to calculate I don't see why that should matter. Sure, on a more complicated and slow query, retrieving an already calculated result will be faster. However, retrieving even the simplest of results from memory should be faster than opening a file on disk, preparing a db handle, querying, and then returning the result. At worst, it should be about the same, not 30% worse! when small people start casting long shadows, it is time to go to bed	[reply]
Re^5: learning memcached by Anonymous Monk on May 21, 2011 at 03:18 UTC
However, retrieving even the simplest of results from memory should be faster than opening a file on disk, preparing a db handle, querying, and then returning the result. I don't think SQLite uses sockets. memcached does use socket. That might explain the difference, maybe benchmark against a database which uses sockets. Or maybe opening "foo.txt" is skewing the results (unlikely, but it could happen) At worst, it should be about the same, not 30% worse I literally don't know about that, you might wish to ask the mailing list (amusing story about that).	[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom