<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Recovery Time for TokuDB</title>
	<atom:link href="http://tokutek.com/2009/12/recovery-time-for-tokudb/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://tokutek.com/2009/12/recovery-time-for-tokudb/</link>
	<description>Database Performance</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 21 Jul 2010 20:52:01 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Recovery Times – Part Deux &#124; Tokutek</title>
		<link>http://tokutek.com/2009/12/recovery-time-for-tokudb/comment-page-1/#comment-400</link>
		<dc:creator>Recovery Times – Part Deux &#124; Tokutek</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Jan 2010 20:13:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tokutek.com/?p=943#comment-400</guid>
		<description>[...] a follow-up experiment to an earlier post on TokuDB recovery times, I tried to create a better apples-to-apples comparison to InnoDB recovery [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] a follow-up experiment to an earlier post on TokuDB recovery times, I tried to create a better apples-to-apples comparison to InnoDB recovery [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dave</title>
		<link>http://tokutek.com/2009/12/recovery-time-for-tokudb/comment-page-1/#comment-326</link>
		<dc:creator>dave</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Jan 2010 18:27:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tokutek.com/?p=943#comment-326</guid>
		<description>Domas - thanks for the pointer.  You are correct.  I re-ran the experiment, and it only took 1020s to recover with your patched version.  Do you have any idea when these changes will be rolled into the standard product?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Domas &#8211; thanks for the pointer.  You are correct.  I re-ran the experiment, and it only took 1020s to recover with your patched version.  Do you have any idea when these changes will be rolled into the standard product?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Domas Mituzas</title>
		<link>http://tokutek.com/2009/12/recovery-time-for-tokudb/comment-page-1/#comment-249</link>
		<dc:creator>Domas Mituzas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Dec 2009 12:43:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tokutek.com/?p=943#comment-249</guid>
		<description>oh come on, everyone knows that InnoDB has two low hanging fruits, that are relatively small patches, which would make recovery as fast as TokuDB&#039;s. 

See http://mituzas.lt/2009/12/08/crash-recovery-again/ for example :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>oh come on, everyone knows that InnoDB has two low hanging fruits, that are relatively small patches, which would make recovery as fast as TokuDB&#8217;s. </p>
<p>See <a href="http://mituzas.lt/2009/12/08/crash-recovery-again/" rel="nofollow">http://mituzas.lt/2009/12/08/crash-recovery-again/</a> for example <img src='http://tokutek.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
