feat: harden storage, schema persistence, fair benches, fix wire crash

Core storage: hash MemTable, WAL group commit, L0 compaction rebuild, reader-writer lock, and a global StorageGate so HTTP workers and TCP share the LSM safely under multi-thread access. Schema: durable CREATE/ALTER/DROP under _schema:tables:* with full LSM restore on open. Executor types/values/schema split into query/exec/. Wire protocol: switch default MM to ARC — ORC cycle collector segfaulted after ~20 async INSERTs. Fair multi-tier benchmarks (SQLite/HTTP/wire/PG) and honesty docs for mixed-tier comparisons.
2026-07-18 16:55:50 +03:00
parent aa4ab11210
commit 8db5cfe7e1
31 changed files with 3131 additions and 797 deletions
@@ -1,38 +1,29 @@
-# BaraDB vs PostgreSQL — Real Benchmark Results
+# Legacy mixed-tier comparison

-Generated from actual execution on:
- **CPU:** AMD Ryzen 9 5900X
- **PostgreSQL:** 15.18 (local)
- **BaraDB:** git `42043f3`
+This file used to claim large “speedups” of BaraDB over PostgreSQL by comparing:

-## Methodology
+- **PostgreSQL:** client-server (psycopg2, network, SQL)
+- **BaraDB:** in-process LSM (no network, no SQL)

- PostgreSQL: single-row INSERT/SELECT via psycopg2 (client-server overhead included)
- BaraDB: in-process Nim code (no network overhead)
- Same dataset sizes for both systems
+That is **not a fair product comparison**.

-## Results
+## Use the fair suite instead

-| Test | PostgreSQL | BaraDB | Speedup |
-|------|-----------|--------|---------|
-| KV Write (100K) | 16.82K/s (5.946s) | 32.23K/s (3.103s) | 1.9x (BaraDB) |
-| KV Read (100K) | 15.08K/s (6.630s) | 3.95M/s (25.3ms) | 261.9x (BaraDB) |
-| BTree Insert (100K) | 17.66K/s (5.664s) | 2.52M/s (39.7ms) | 142.8x (BaraDB) |
-| BTree Get (100K) | 14.50K/s (6.899s) | 2.34M/s (42.7ms) | 161.4x (BaraDB) |
-| BTree Scan (1K ranges) | 2.39K/s (419.2ms) | 11.03M/s (1.0ms) | 4623.3x (BaraDB) |
-| FTS Index (10K docs) | 17.98K/s (556.3ms) | 119.99K/s (83.3ms) | 6.7x (BaraDB) |
-| FTS Search (1K queries) | 784.12/s (1.275s) | 1.36K/s (734.0ms) | 1.7x (BaraDB) |
+```bash
+nim c -d:release -r benchmarks/bench_all.nim   # embedded BaraDB
+python3 benchmarks/fair_bench.py               # SQLite + optional PG/HTTP
+# report → benchmarks/FAIR_COMPARISON.md
+```

-## Summary
+See:

- **Total PostgreSQL time:** 27.389s
- **Total BaraDB time:** 4.029s
- **Overall speedup:** BaraDB is **6.8x faster**
+- [`FAIR_COMPARISON.md`](FAIR_COMPARISON.md) — latest multi-tier results  
+- [`README.md`](README.md) — methodology and env vars  

-## Notes
+## If you regenerate the legacy report

- PostgreSQL includes network round-trip and SQL parsing overhead per operation.
- BaraDB runs in-process with zero serialization/network cost.
- For embedded/single-node use cases, BaraDB shows significant advantage.
- BaraDB now outperforms PostgreSQL on all tested metrics including FTS search after optimizations.
- PostgreSQL excels at durability, replication, and complex ACID transactions.
+```bash
+python3 benchmarks/generate_report.py   # without --fair
+```
+
+It will rewrite this file with an explicit **mixed tiers** warning banner.