Comments on: CouchDB View Performance (Python vs JavaScript)

By: Vioreacratiok

Vioreacratiok — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 07:20:09 +0000

I do think this is a most incredible website for proclaiming great wonders of Our God!

By: Dan Mosedale

Dan Mosedale — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 22:53:22 +0000

Oh, hey, I see you already mentioned that in a previous comment. Never mind!

By: Dan Mosedale

Dan Mosedale — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 22:52:37 +0000

As far as JS views are concerned, do you have any idea whether CouchDB is using the trace-based nanoJIT in SpiderMonkey? If not, that could be an interesting avenue to explore…

By: mikeal

mikeal — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 19:42:04 +0000

@jchris CouchDB version info

# git rev-list –max-count=1 HEAD
12aa5125b2b774147d6106577075d8f1b0f650be

Which appears to be about 3 days old:

http://github.com/mikeal/couchdb/commit/12aa5125b2b774147d6106577075d8f1b0f650be

By: mikeal

mikeal — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 19:36:00 +0000

@jan I think it goes without saying that the erlang views would be drastically faster. Since the biggest performance difference appears to be JSON serialization that entire step would be cut out in the native views.

@ Lucian processing time inside the views is almost indistinguishable in these tests and accounts for an incredibly minimal part of the total time. If i were to do a “mega view” test with a lot of logic in it we would see more of a difference. While SquirrelFish and V8 have some good performance work the traceing work in Spidermonkey 1.8 (AKA TraceMonkey) fits the expected usage profile for views a lot closer and I would expect it to beat out any competitors since it’s optimized for almost this *exact* use case.

What could increase performance more than anything else is a faster JSON serializer and I don’t know if SquirrelFish and V8 have optimized C JSON serializers available.

By: Lucian

Lucian — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 11:15:24 +0000

I’m curious about SquirrelFish or V8 performance. V8 in particular has a lot of optimisations for using JS as a general-purpose language.

Also, how about psyco with that python view server? I’m curious if it’s worth the memory hit.

By: Jan Lehnardt

Jan Lehnardt — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 10:47:08 +0000

Seconding @neville here. I’d like to see Erlang views for a comparison. And Spidermonkey 1.8.1 would be nice, too.

By: href » flot-käppyräkirjasto käyttää canvas-elementtiä

href » flot-käppyräkirjasto käyttää canvas-elementtiä — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 09:29:09 +0000

[...] Via Michael Rogers: “CouchDB View Performance (Python vs JavaScript)”. [...]

By: href » flot-käppyräkirjasto käyttää canvas-elementtiä

href » flot-käppyräkirjasto käyttää canvas-elementtiä — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 09:29:09 +0000

[...] Via Michael Rogers: “CouchDB View Performance (Python vs JavaScript)”. [...]

By: Lê Biên Cương (cuonglb) 's status on Thursday, 05-Nov-09 07:49:36 UTC - Identi.ca

Thu, 05 Nov 2009 07:49:41 +0000

[...] #CouchDB !CouchDB View Performance (#Python vs #JavaScript) http://www.mikealrogers.com/archives/673 [...]

By: Neville Burnell

Neville Burnell — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 07:35:42 +0000

Interesting comparison.

It would be worth you implementing the same views in Erlang to get “native” couchdb performance.

Neville

By: DDevine

DDevine — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 05:06:11 +0000

Hey, just looked at your python view library, looks great. I am yet to use CouchDB but I am planning on using it as a document storage backend for my new CherryPy based website.

By: Chris Anderson

Chris Anderson — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 03:01:07 +0000

Mikeal,

Great graphs. I like up and to the right!

I’m curious what your CouchDB version is for this. Damien *just* landed some optimizations to the writer which may or may not effect views. Also there was that big 5x speedup from September.