This section is about baseline performance

and highly unscientific, too
This commit is contained in:
Michael Klishin 2013-08-17 17:56:52 +04:00
parent 182a82315f
commit 3801c37f51

View file

@ -107,10 +107,12 @@ Monger is part of the [group of Clojure libraries known as ClojureWerkz](http://
[Cassaforte](http://clojurecassandra.info), [Langohr](http://clojurerabbitmq.info), [Elastisch](http://clojureelasticsearch.info), [Titanium](http://titanium.clojurewerkz.org), [Quartzite](http://clojurequartz.info) and several others. [Cassaforte](http://clojurecassandra.info), [Langohr](http://clojurerabbitmq.info), [Elastisch](http://clojureelasticsearch.info), [Titanium](http://titanium.clojurewerkz.org), [Quartzite](http://clojurequartz.info) and several others.
## Write Performance ## Baseline Performance
Monger insert operations are efficient and have very little overhead compared to the underlying Java driver. Here Monger is efficient and has very little overhead
are some (very unscientific) numbers on a MacBook Pro from fall 2010 with Core i7 and an Intel SSD drive: compared to the underlying Java driver. Here is one (very
unscientific) benchmark on a MacBook Pro from mid-2010 with Core i7
and an Intel SSD drive:
``` ```
Testing monger.test.stress Testing monger.test.stress
@ -122,7 +124,8 @@ Inserting 100000 documents...
"Elapsed time: 515.969 msecs" "Elapsed time: 515.969 msecs"
``` ```
With the `SAFE` write concern, it takes roughly 0.5 second to insert 100,000 documents with Clojure 1.3.0. With the `SAFE` write concern, it takes roughly 0.5 second to insert
100,000 documents with Clojure 1.3.0.