[erlang-questions] ets:next/2 behavior - set vs. ordered_set
Fri Sep 16 21:47:23 CEST 2011
The main issues that I'm aware of are that a dets file can't be larger
than 2GB, ordered_set isn't supported, repair is often not very fast,
and the only way to defragment a table is to close it and re-open it
with repair set to force (mostly a problem because of the 2GB limit).
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 11:46 AM, Jon Watte <> wrote:
> In what way is dets not production worthy?
> Americans might object: there is no way we would sacrifice our living
> standards for the benefit of people in the rest of the world. Nevertheless,
> whether we get there willingly or not, we shall soon have lower consumption
> rates, because our present rates are unsustainable.
> On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 7:07 PM, Joseph Norton <>
>> The basic goal is to build and test a production worthy replacement for
>> ets with disk based storage. After I have the basics in place, I can
>> elaborate further.
>> Joseph Norton
>> On Sep 13, 2011, at 9:55 AM, OvermindDL1 wrote:
>> > On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Joseph Wayne Norton
>> > <> wrote:
>> >> I'm currently developing a disk based clone of the ets application.
>> > Can you elaborate how this is different from dets, or are you doing it
>> > for learning?
>> erlang-questions mailing list
> erlang-questions mailing list
More information about the erlang-questions