Thu Jan 23 21:55:15 CET 2003
I can only speak for the AXD 301 project. We decided early on not to use
mnemosyne because it was too slow.
I will qualify that: AXD 301 is at its core an ATM call control machine, and
it's supposed to be really fast and responsive (e.g. ~100 calls/s per
processor). We avoided mnemosyne for the same reason we would have avoided
using SQL. We did not have complex enough queries that really warranted the
use of mnemosyne anywhere, and it was never intended for real-time database
Personally, I think mnemosyne is a great idea (albeit not for telecom
The thesis "SQL compiler for the Mnesia DBMS"
(http://www.erlang.se/publications/xjobb/sql_compiler_report.pdf) lists a
few things that should be fixed in mnemosyne, but also hints that it does a
pretty good job already. Others who have actually used it more may have more
information. I'd like to see the "bugs" in mnemosyne fixed and the SQL
prototype productified, but someone has to want it badly enough...
For historical reasons, it was never really given a chance to mature from
prototype to product, but was basically just thrown into the first OTP
together with mnesia. While mnesia _was_ extremely useful for telecoms and
was put under high pressure to improve over the years, mnemosyne was not
given the same attention.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Eric Merritt" <>
Sent: den 23 januari 2003 21:29
Subject: Mnemosyne Problems?
> Latly there have been a few posts (in the structs
> thread) that indicated that there were some serious
> problems with mnemosyne. I am not using it yet, but I
> have thought about using it in my next project and I
> would really like to know what the problems are before
> I get started.
> It would be great if some of you could elaborate on
> the problems you have had with mnemosyne. It looked
> like an elegant way to handle complex queries to me,
> so I would be very interested in your insights.
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
More information about the erlang-questions