Usage question

[dineshbvadhia]

My lmdb db has multiple tables to support mostly reads and few writes in operation.

However, 2 tables support an equal number of writes, reads and deletes. These tables are independent of the other tables in the db.

As performance is critical, would it be better to create a seperate lmdb db for these 2 tables?

[jnwatson]

Named databases in LMDB work by prepending the database name to each key in that databsae.

If you're more likely to access one table at a time, even for just a few records, it would be beneficial to separate them into 2 databases, as the cache is more likely to be warm for the BTree parent nodes that are shared among those common records.

[dineshbvadhia]

@jnwatson Apologies, as I always state the lmdb terminology incorrectly.

The lmdb environment has max_dbs=N named databases.

Each of N-2 named databases are mostly reads with few writes.

Of the remaining 2, each have writes, reads and deletes spread equally (and operate independently of the N-2 named databases).

As performance is critical, would it be better to create a seperate lmdb environment for the 2 named databases?