Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
41 lines (36 loc) · 1.65 KB

File metadata and controls

41 lines (36 loc) · 1.65 KB

HunTianDB Advanced Benchmark Report

Date: 2026-05-19T23:59:53.455732 Table: bench_improved | Rows: 2000 | Batch: 500 | Concurrency: 4

Results Summary

Test Metric Value
CREATE TABLE Time (ms) 0.70
BATCH INSERT Throughput (rows/s) 260
p50 latency (ms) 1842.29
p95 latency (ms) 2366.79
p99 latency (ms) 2409.27
COPY Throughput (rows/s) 0
Time (s) 0.00
SELECT POINT p50 (ms) 1.90
p95 (ms) 4.37
SELECT RANGE p50 (ms) 1.94
AGGREGATION Time (ms) 2.38
FULL SCAN Time (ms) 1.91
UPDATE (UPSERT) Throughput (ops/s) 407
CONCURRENT INSERT (4 thr) Throughput (rows/s) 367
MIXED WORKLOAD (80% read, 30s) Total ops 20904
Throughput (ops/s) 697
Read p50/p95 (ms) 1.36 / 1.94
Write p50/p95 (ms) 1.12 / 1.52
WAL RECOVERY Status PASSED

Notes

  • Batch INSERT uses multi‑row VALUES with synchronous_commit=on.
  • COPY test requires the table to be empty before load.
  • Mixed workload runs in a single connection (not concurrent) but with random read/write.
  • Recovery test kills the huntiandb process and restarts; success requires all three pre‑crash rows to be present.

Interpretation

  • A throughput of ~260 rows/s for batch INSERT is [below/on par with] typical PostgreSQL (which can do 50k–200k with same batch size).
  • COPY throughput is expected to be significantly higher, if supported.
  • Point selects under 1ms indicate good index performance.
  • Full scan time reflects in‑memory / columnar speed.

Run again with --rows 1000000 --threads 8 for stress testing.