Hi Evgeniy,

Thank you. I see that the ticket is unassigned.

Would you like to contribute PR to be macro-benchmarked with Ignite?

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

вт, 14 авг. 2018 г. в 20:57, Евгений Станиловский
<arzamas...@mail.ru.invalid>:

> I fill the ticket, bench code attached there.
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-9272
> Thanks!
>
>
> >Has anyone else run the benchmark and reproduced the performance
> >difference?
> >
> >On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 8:16 AM, Dmitriy Pavlov < dpavlov....@gmail.com >
> >wrote:
> >
> >> It depends.
> >>
> >> CRC is a CPU-intensive operation, while WAL logging and page store write
> >> are mostly about IO speed.
> >>
> >> In the same time, it can make the huge impact on machines with fast IO
> >> and
> >> slow CPU. So if we can apply change proposed by Evgeniy and Alexey it
> >> could
> >> benefit performance because we save CPU. Later we can use it's power in
> a
> >> more efficient manner (e.g. with compression).
> >>
> >> вт, 14 авг. 2018 г. в 14:03, Yakov Zhdanov < yzhda...@apache.org >:
> >>
> >> > Guys, what time in % does crc calculation take in WAL logging process?
> >> >
> >> > --Yakov
> >> >
> >> > 2018-08-14 13:37 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Pavlov < dpavlov....@gmail.com >:
> >> >
> >> > > Hi Alex, thank you for this idea.
> >> > >
> >> > > Evgeniy, Alex, would you like to submit the patch with bypassing
> >> > > implementation differences to keep compatibility?
> >> > >
> >> > > Sincerely,
> >> > > Dmitriy Pavlov
> >> > >
> >> > > вт, 14 авг. 2018 г. в 12:06, Alex Plehanov <
> plehanov.a...@gmail.com >:
> >> > >
> >> > > > Hello, Igniters!
> >> > > >
> >> > > > In java8 java.lang.zip.CRC32 methods become intrinsic, moreover
> new
> >> > > > "update" method, which use ByteBuffer was introduced. Since we
> >> moved
> >> to
> >> > > > java8, perhaps we really can get performance boost by using
> >> standard
> >> > > > java.lang.zip.CRC32 instead of PureJavaCrc32.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > About compatibility: looks like PureJavaCrc32 implements the same
> >> > > algorithm
> >> > > > as java.lang.zip.CRC32. These two implementations uses the same
> >> > > polynomial
> >> > > > and the same initial value. The only difference is final xor mask
> >> > > > (0xFFFFFFFF for java.lang.zip.CRC32). So, we can easily convert
> >> from
> >> > > > PureJavaCrc32
> >> > > > to standard CRC32 and vice versa, using this expression: crc32 ^=
> >> > > > 0xFFFFFFFF
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > 2018-08-14 0:19 GMT+03:00 Eduard Shangareev <
> >> >  eduard.shangar...@gmail.com
> >> > > >:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > > Evgeniy,
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > Could you share benchmark code? And please share what version of
> >> JVM
> >> > > > > you have used.
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 10:44 PM Zhenya
> >> < arzamas...@mail.ru.invalid
> >> >
> >> > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > > I think it would break backward compatibility, as Nikolay
> >> mentioned
> >> > > > above
> >> > > > > > we would take exception here:
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > [1]
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >  https://github.com/apache/ignite/blob/master/modules/
> >> > > > > core/src/main/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/processors/
> >> > > > > cache/persistence/file/FilePageStore.java#L372
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > thats why i question for community thoughts here.
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > Hi Evgeniy,
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > would you like to submit a patch with CRC32 implementation
> >> > change?
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > Sincerely,
> >> > > > > > > Dmitriy Pavlov
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > пн, 13 авг. 2018 г. в 22:08, Евгений Станиловский
> >> > > > > > > < arzamas...@mail.ru.invalid >:
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > >> Hi, igniters, i wrote a simple bench, looks like
> >> PureJavaCrc32
> >> > has
> >> > > > > > >> performance problems in compatible with zip.CRC32.
> >> > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > >> Benchmark Mode Cnt Score Error Units
> >> > > > > > >> BenchmarkCRC.Crc32 avgt 5 1088914.540 ± 368851.822 ns/op
> >> > > > > > >> BenchmarkCRC.pureJavaCrc32 avgt 5 6619408.049 ± 3746712.210
> >> > ns/op
> >> > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > >> thoughts?
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
>
>
> --
> Евгений Станиловский
>

Reply via email to