Dario good point, I’ve added a comment at the beginning of the article

Some people seem to be unaware these results were updated in https://www.arangodb.com/2015/06/how-an-open-source-competitive-benchmark-helped-to-improve-databases/.

@weinberger:disqus, is it possible to add an update to this blog post pointing to the newest results in order to avoid confusion?

Could you also publish the standard deviations? It’s interesting to see if a result is stable or not.

Thank you for your work.

We will try the new release OrientDB, in which you have reimplemented the shortest path to match Neo4J’s algorithms. I assume we should now see similar results, but as you know if performance should yield reliable and reproducible result and that is not done within hours. We run the tests several times. I took you a week to reimplement the algorithms and produce new drivers, so give as few days to run the tests.

We will then publish a update – also with the new results for Neo4J. That should gives as proof-able results instead of marketing statements.

However, who is interested in running the tests themselves, just clone this repository:

https://github.com/maggiolo00/nosql-tests

We are still waiting for the Arango team to update the results…

It’s really great. I love to see all the contributions and improvements. MongoDB made really good steps forward and Neo4J will come with an update soon.

We didn’t get any contribution or improvement proposal from OrientDB by now. Any improvement which fits to the test are more than welcome. I tried to write such an invitation in their google group (last friday) but this waits for a proofing from the moderator.

btw, I meant, did you actually profile the drivers to see what percentage of CPU time is spent where? if you suspect there may be a bottleneck somewhere, profiling (not benchmarking) might reveal something.