有人尝试过使用 CouchDB 更改不同的 javascript 查询服务器并对其进行基准测试吗？
CouchDB 附带了一个默认的 JS 查询服务器 couchJS，它负责解释 JS 视图（以及过滤器和显示），似乎是 Mozilla SpiderMonkey 的一个版本。如果您查看二进制文件中的字符串，CouchDB 1.0.1 附带的似乎是 SpiderMonkey 1.8.5。然而，还有其他（实际上有很多）JS 引擎，从 V8 到 JägerMonkey，它们可能提供（也可能不会）更好的性能，至少对于复杂的视图或过滤器来说是这样。 有人尝试过吗？值得吗？ （也许第一个问题是它们会起作用吗？甚至你自己尝试过吗？但是，嘿，如果没有人尝试过，我可以做到，不想浪费我的时间）
CouchDB ships with a default JS query server, couchJS, which is in charge of interpreting JS views (and filters, and shows) and seems to be a version of Mozilla SpiderMonkey. The one shipping with CouchDB 1.0.1 seems to be SpiderMonkey 1.8.5, if you look at the strings within the binary. However, there are other (many, in fact) JS engines out there, from V8 to JägerMonkey, which might offer (or maybe not) better performance, at least with complicated views or filters.
Has anybody tried that? Would it be worth the while? (Maybe the first question would be would they work? and even have you tried it yourself?, but, hey, I can do it if nobody has, don't want to waste my time)
如果你对这篇内容有疑问，欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论，获取更多帮助，或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。
绑定邮箱获取回复消息
由于您还没有绑定你的真实邮箱，如果其他用户或者作者回复了您的评论，将不能在第一时间通知您！
发布评论
评论（1）
CouchDB 与 SpiderMonkey 链接，因此 CouchDB 1.0.1 可以与任何多种 SpiderMonkey 版本一起运行。 （同样，您的浏览器可能运行 Java 或 Flash 插件的多个版本之一。）
我维护 Build-CouchDB< /a> 这确实构建了一个相当新的 SpiderMonkey，用于推测的跟踪 JIT 改进；但我从未见过基准。
普遍的共识是 JavaScript VM 执行速度不是 CouchDB 的瓶颈，因此使其更快并不会让 CouchDB 明显更快。
CouchDB links against SpiderMonkey, so CouchDB 1.0.1 might run with any of a large variety of SpiderMonkey releases. (Similarly, your browser might run one of many releases of the Java or Flash plugin.)
I maintain Build-CouchDB and that does build a pretty recent SpiderMonkey, for presumed tracing JIT improvements; however I have never seen a benchmark.
The general consensus is that the JavaScript VM execution speed is not the bottleneck for CouchDB and so making it faster would not make CouchDB appreciably faster.