IndexedDB性能 [英] IndexedDB performance

问题描述

任何人都可以给我一篇文章，或者最好提供一些关于IndexedDB性能的经验（理想情况是在Chrome中） - 什么是获取，插入和更新性能？

似乎有合理的意见认为它对数据集超过几千条记录几乎不可用，但我不确定这是否仅仅是由于缺乏索引 - 从概念上讲，它肯定不会比慢网络存储作为两个大概在内部使用键值存储？

谢谢

解决方案

我最近在WebSQL和IndexedDB之间进行了一些性能比较。令人惊讶的是，IndexedDB赢了（我并不期待）。

http://blog.oharagroup.net/post/16394604653/a-performance-comparison-websql-vs-indexeddb

---

编辑：上述网址已关闭，但在archive.org上可用： http://web.archive.org/web/ 20160418233232 / http：//blog.oharagroup.net/post/16394604653/a-performance-comparison-websql-vs-indexeddb

总结：

WebSQL平均需要大约750-850毫秒才能完成查询并呈现结果;并且IndexedDB平均需要300〜350ms才能得到完全相同的结果。

Can anyone point me to an article on, or preferably provide some experience of performance of IndexedDB (ideally in Chrome) - what is the fetch, insert and update performance like?

There seems to be reasonable amount of opinion that its pretty much unusable for data sets of more than a few thousand records but I'm not sure if this isnt just due to a lack of indexing - surely conceptually it cant be slower than web storage as both presumably use key-value storage internally?

Thanks

解决方案

I recently did some performance comparisons between WebSQL and IndexedDB. Surprisingly, IndexedDB won (which I wasn't expecting).

http://blog.oharagroup.net/post/16394604653/a-performance-comparison-websql-vs-indexeddb

---

Edit: the above URL is down, but available on archive.org: http://web.archive.org/web/20160418233232/http://blog.oharagroup.net/post/16394604653/a-performance-comparison-websql-vs-indexeddb

In summary:

WebSQL takes on average between ~750-850ms to complete the query and render the results; and IndexedDB takes on average ~300-350ms to render the exact same results.

这篇关于IndexedDB性能的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！