<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Database on Townsourced Tech Blog</title>
    <link>https://tech.townsourced.com/tags/database/</link>
    <description>Recent content in Database on Townsourced Tech Blog</description>
    <generator>Hugo -- gohugo.io</generator>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <copyright>This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.</copyright>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 29 Jan 2019 19:36:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    
	<atom:link href="https://tech.townsourced.com/tags/database/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    
    
    <item>
      <title>BoltDB vs Badger: A Comparison of Go Key-Value databases</title>
      <link>https://tech.townsourced.com/post/boltdb-vs-badger/</link>
      <pubDate>Tue, 29 Jan 2019 19:36:00 +0000</pubDate>
      
      <guid>https://tech.townsourced.com/post/boltdb-vs-badger/</guid>
      <description>When I first started working on BoltHold (a simple querying and index engine that sits on top of BoltDB), Badger didn&amp;rsquo;t yet exist, and BoltDB was the clear leader of the pack for key-value, pure-go, embeddable databases.
Then Badger was released, and it was shown to be more than just a pure-go version of LSM-tree stores like RocksDB / LevelDB, it actually was faster than RocksDB. Much faster. I knew I wanted to build something with Badger in the future, and when an issue was opened to add Badger support to Bolthold, I jumped on it.</description>
    </item>
    
  </channel>
</rss>