Received: by 10.52.88.102 with SMTP id bf6mr2385611vdb.2.1330550563462;
        Wed, 29 Feb 2012 13:22:43 -0800 (PST)
X-BeenThere: fluiddb-users@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.220.102.136 with SMTP id g8ls897518vco.2.gmail; Wed, 29 Feb
 2012 13:22:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.52.88.102 with SMTP id bf6mr2385581vdb.2.1330550563102;
        Wed, 29 Feb 2012 13:22:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.52.88.102 with SMTP id bf6mr2385580vdb.2.1330550563093;
        Wed, 29 Feb 2012 13:22:43 -0800 (PST)
Return-Path: <te...@jon.es>
Received: from mail-vw0-f41.google.com (mail-vw0-f41.google.com [209.85.212.41])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id b3si5070653vdf.2.2012.02.29.13.22.42
        (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
        Wed, 29 Feb 2012 13:22:42 -0800 (PST)
Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 209.85.212.41 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of te...@jon.es) client-ip=209.85.212.41;
Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 209.85.212.41 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of te...@jon.es) smtp.mail=te...@jon.es
Received: by mail-vw0-f41.google.com with SMTP id ey12so3363201vbb.0
        for <fluiddb-users@googlegroups.com>; Wed, 29 Feb 2012 13:22:42 -0800 (PST)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of te...@jon.es designates 10.52.65.134 as permitted sender) client-ip=10.52.65.134;
Received: from mr.google.com ([10.52.65.134])
        by 10.52.65.134 with SMTP id x6mr841062vds.60.1330550562936 (num_hops = 1);
        Wed, 29 Feb 2012 13:22:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.52.65.134 with SMTP id x6mr728245vds.60.1330550562704;
        Wed, 29 Feb 2012 13:22:42 -0800 (PST)
Return-Path: <te...@jon.es>
Received: from terryT61p (cpe-98-14-146-223.nyc.res.rr.com. [98.14.146.223])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id i1sm4176804vdt.20.2012.02.29.13.22.41
        (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
        Wed, 29 Feb 2012 13:22:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: by terryT61p (Postfix, from userid 1000)
	id C3414882ABD; Wed, 29 Feb 2012 16:22:21 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <20302.38669.424084.44...@jon.es>
Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 16:22:21 -0500
From: Terry Jones <te...@jon.es>
To: Bogdan Marin <mr.marin.bog...@gmail.com>
Cc: fluiddb-users@googlegroups.com,
    nfpetrov...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Fluidinfo performance
In-Reply-To: Your message at 12:32:07 on Sunday, 26 February 2012
References: <CALugm_u7AtQt8ykSkXOCeLaC=hswhwPuriNFO79XaCev7xc...@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: VM 8.2.0a under 23.1.1 (i486-pc-linux-gnu)
Reply-To: te...@fluidinfo.com
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmaIJ20rzQpjEhf8tKKbNjMiDFKNo+1azneOq1wug5FA1xbDySbu5pS5AmY8Ofu2DTNvzTA

Hi Bogdan

Sorry for the slow reply.

> 1. Is "has" operator faster then "matches" ? What is the fastest way to
> query fluidinfo ?

I'll leave Esteve or Manuel to answer that.

> 2. How can we implement pagination on these queries, we don't want to
> load 1mil results ? We need a LIMIT sort of operator

Yes, agreed. This is under active discussion right now.

> 3. How many simultaneous clients can query the system ? Ideally, we want
> O(1) query complexity on 1000 parallel queries .

Well, O(1) includes "a week" or any other constant, so I think we've got
you covered already :-)

Right now we have requests going through haproxy and there are 8 processes
handling queries, I think up to 2 simultaneously. After that things will be
queued momentarily. We can obviously increase that. Jamu is probably the
best person to comment on this.

> 4. I know that objects cannot be deleted, but what happens if we remove
> the tags and a lot of dummy objects will be kept in the system ?

Yes, but empty objects don't take up any space, apart from one row in a db
(it's only tags that cause storage). So I certainly wouldn't worry about
that at all, but thanks!

Terry