Comment by murtazayusuf

It is mostly because kividb can utilize all the cores you can allow on a machine, whereas Antirez built redis as a single threaded cache. The fairer comparison imo would be with redis cluster row in the table where 32 Redis shards were created, one per core, resulting 4.7M pipelined GETs/s. KiviDB’s 21.2M against that is down to not paying for cluster routing and per-shard overhead, and to io_uring batching.