Myrna van Lunteren <[email protected]> writes: > I don't intend to do any performance tests at this point - is anyone > else doing any?
I've been keeping an eye on the nightly performance tests on trunk (http://home.online.no/~olmsan/derby/perf/) and haven't noticed any big changes after 10.7. I'd expect the performance of 10.8 to be very close to trunk, but I've started some of the test clients on the RC just in case. The performance changes I have noticed lately are: 1) DERBY-5068 - higher CPU usage on the client after the introduction of UTF-8 CcsidManager. I'm planning to look into it to see where the extra CPU is spent. But this happened before 10.7.1.1 and shouldn't be a blocker for the 10.8 release. 2) The full table scans in the nightly test, as well as the TPC-B like transactions, seem to have been running slightly slower the last two months (see http://home.online.no/~olmsan/derby/perf/tpcb_1y.html and http://home.online.no/~olmsan/derby/perf/select_sec_noindex_1y.html). It may be worth looking into if this is an actual degradation or just noise. But even if it turns out that it is a real performance degradation, it appears to be so small that it wouldn't be worth blocking the release. -- Knut Anders
