|
|
|
|
|
|
by aymanhs72
17 days ago
|
|
|
I have used VM for a while and for my use case it was way better than influxdb. VM process takes 70 to 100Mb memory on my system. Not bad, but not great. NanoTDB takes just about 10 to 20Mb, and that does include the dashboard. NanoTDB is much simpler in design and does have less features, but I think that's it's power. I didn't compare disk usage. NanoTDB is also very optimized for SD usage. You can tune it to be very resilient to shutdowns but less SD friendly, or you can tolerate missing some metrics and not write everything to the WAL file, and you can have anything in between. |
|
|