Comments on: Redis vs MySQL vs Tokyo Tyrant (on EC2)

By: hc

hc — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 19:39:59 +0000

FLKC = FreeBSD + lighttpd + key value store + (ANSI) C

By: Scalable Database Links « streamhacker.com

Scalable Database Links « streamhacker.com — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 16:02:25 +0000

[...] Redis vs MySQL vs Tokyo Tyrant (on EC2) « Colin Howe’s Blog [...]

By: Will Radford

Will Radford — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 21:53:24 +0000

Looking at the latest version of TT (1.1.34), you should be able to start it as an ‘on-memory’ hash or tree database:

$ ttserver ‘*’ # hash
$ ttserver ‘+’ # tree

I’d be interested to see how these stacked up against Redis.

By: Interesting Finds: 2009 09.06 ~ 09.14 - gOODiDEA.NET

Interesting Finds: 2009 09.06 ~ 09.14 - gOODiDEA.NET — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 05:33:26 +0000

[...] Redis vs MySQL vs Tokyo Tyrant (on EC2) [...]

By: Shared Items - September 11, 2009 « Jeetu’s Shared Memory

Shared Items - September 11, 2009 « Jeetu’s Shared Memory — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 16:11:24 +0000

[...] Redis vs MySQL vs Tokyo Tyrant (on EC2) « Colin Howe’s Blog [...]

By: Vina Key-Value Store System Benchmark | Haytham El-Fadeel

Vina Key-Value Store System Benchmark | Haytham El-Fadeel — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 13:17:40 +0000

[...] you like to saw other benchmark for other Key-Value systems check this links: – Redis vs MySQL vs Tokyo Tyrant (on EC2) – Redis Benchmark Share and [...]

By: Tim

Tim — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 03:19:47 +0000

FYI, I’ve also made a performance test for Redis, Tokyo Tyrant and MemcacheDB.
http://timyang.net/data/mcdb-tt-redis/

By: Krut

Krut — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 08:40:02 +0000

What makes Redis special, and in certain use cases, makes it an obvious choice, is it’s support for lists and sets. If you want to benchmark mysql getting it’s but handed to it (nbd or not), try to intersect a few million row tables, vs a few million member Redis sets…

By: ActsAsFlinn

ActsAsFlinn — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 17:45:01 +0000

At this point NDB doesn’t require the entire database in memory, Redis does (at least right now, I have a feeling it will change).

I think the point is MySQL Cluster is significantly more complex a configuration compared to a vanilla Redis or Tyrant install. Out of the box without tuning both of those solutions are faster in terms of performance and easier to setup.

All that said, all three of those solutions occupy entirely different segments. MySQL is RDBMS while Redis and Tokyo Tyrant are networked hash dbs. Tokyo Cabinet is still yet different as an embeddable hash storage.

All of these speed comparisons are nice because they get people to think about other solutions but they are all comparing apple to oranges.

By: Otis Gospodnetic

Otis Gospodnetic — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 16:35:17 +0000

But they all load/cache some data into memory – they have to. So are you saying MySQL requires *all* data to be memory resident at all times?

Checkpointing is fine, too, for lots of people/applications. I think the comment in that other blog post said checkpointing happens every 2 seconds, which means you could lose 2 seconds-worth of data, which is no big deal for some applications.