hello, can you recheck with OPTIMISTIC SERILIZABLE tx`s ?
>Hello all, > >For our project we need a distributed database with transactional support, >and Ignite is one of the options we are testing. > >Scalability is one of our must have, so we created an Ignite Kubernetes >cluster in Azure to test it, but we found that the results were not what we >expected. > >To discard the problem was in our code or in using transactional caches, we >created a small test program for writing/reading 1.8M keys of 528 bytes >each >(it represents one of our data types). > >As you can see in this graph, reading doesn't seem to scale. Especially >for >the transactional cache, where having 4, 8 or 16 nodes in the cluster >performs worse than having only 2: >< http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/file/t3059/reading.png > > >While writing in atomic caches does... until 8 nodes, then it gets steady >(No transactional times because of this >< https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14076 > ): >< http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/file/t3059/writing.png > > >Another strange thing is that, for atomic caches, reading seems to be >slower >than writing: >< http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/file/t3059/atomic.png > > >So, my questions are: > - Could I been doing something wrong that could lead to this results? > - How could it be possible to get worse reading timings in a 4/8/16 >nodes >cluster than in a 2 nodes cluster for a transactional cache? > - How could reading be slower than writing in atomic caches? > >These are the source code and configuration files we're using: >Test.cpp >< http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/file/t3059/Test.cpp > >Order.h < http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/file/t3059/Order.h > >node-configuration.xml >< >http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/file/t3059/node-configuration.xml > > > >Best regards and thanks in advance! > > > > >-- >Sent from: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/
