Note, the numbers are in millions of writes per second here!

For Random Writes, the numbers are in thousands of writes per second:

Okay, I lied about no commentary. What you can see is that in our test, inserting 1.5 million items to storage. In sequential runs, we get such big variance because the test run itself is so short. (Nitpicker, yes, we’ll post longer benchmarks).

Note that this was running on a pretty good SSD drive, but what about HDD? Yes, that isn’t a mistake, Esent is doing 901 writes per second.

As we have seen, we are pretty good at reading, but what are the current results?

As you can see, we are significantly better than Esent for reads in single and dual threaded modes, but Esent is faster when it can use more threads.

That annoyed me, so I set out to figure out what was blocking us. As it turned out, searching the B-tree was quite expensive, but when I added a very small optimization (remember the last few searched pages), we saw something very interesting).

(The Esent results are different than the previous run because we run it on a different disk (still SSD)).

What about random reads?

Now, one area where we currently suck is large writes, where we are doing really bad, but we’re working on that.

Overall, I am pretty happy about it all.