HSQLDB Cached Table Versus Memory Table Performance & Conversion

    Date: 08/13/07 (Java Web)    Keywords: sql

    In short in HSQLDB cached table sucks in terms of performance. To elaborate I was running a program which takes around 9 hours running on two medium sized cached tables (bigger one 163 MB). I changed the tables to memory tables (default) and it now takes less than 10 minutes. Let’s see how we can [...]

    Source: http://blog.taragana.com/index.php/archive/hsqldb-cached-table-versus-memory-table-performance-conversion/

« The Right To Kill &... || A Plan for Stopping Online... »


antivirus | apache | asp | blogging | browser | bugtracking | cms | crm | css | database | ebay | ecommerce | google | hosting | html | java | jsp | linux | microsoft | mysql | offshore | offshoring | oscommerce | php | postgresql | programming | rss | security | seo | shopping | software | spam | spyware | sql | technology | templates | tracker | virus | web | xml | yahoo | home