HyperLevelDB: A High-Performance LevelDB Fork

Re:HyperLevelDB: A High-Performance LevelDB Fork by keyaell1 on Thursday June 06, 2013 @01:00PM (#5833606)

I'm glad someone is addressing these issues. I think I'm not the only person that have had some bulk-write and compaction related performance problems with LevelDB. I wonder if there is any chance the changes from this fork will be rolled back into LevelDB codebase.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:HyperLevelDB: A High-Performance LevelDB Fork by emin_gun_sirer on Thursday June 06, 2013 @01:42PM (#5833895)

I can answer the opposite question: we intend to keep in sync with upstream. Since HyperLevelDB is a drop-in replacement for LevelDB, it should be fairly easy for LevelDB users to pick it up.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:HyperLevelDB: A High-Performance LevelDB Fork by alexchamberlain on Thursday June 06, 2013 @04:21PM (#5834916)

Why can't you just push it upstream? Is there resistance?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:HyperLevelDB: A High-Performance LevelDB Fork by rescrv on Thursday June 06, 2013 @04:38PM (#5835014)

We will try to push upstream those pieces that upstream would need. Some pieces, such as the autoconfiscated build system are likely not of interest to them, but of interest to us.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:HyperLevelDB: A High-Performance LevelDB Fork by rescrv on Thursday June 06, 2013 @01:27PM (#5833772)

We're doing our best to keep API compatibility with LevelDB and will do our best to keep true to LevelDB. That being said, it'd be great to see our changes flow upstream.

[ Parent | on HN ]