Another one I want to see: The concept of a "storage tier". Means different layers of memory type.
heap -> offheap -> filesystem and vice versa So Eviction doesn't mean, that the memory will be freed. Only if it was not used in the filesystem. 2012/2/20 Benoit Perroud <[email protected]> > On core : > > Merging pointers vs. SLAB (fixed pointer size) allocation. I submitted > a patch some time ago, I will rebase iit with all the recent changes > track it in Jira. > > > 2012/2/20 Raffaele P. Guidi <[email protected]>: > > +1 for benchmarks and I suggest to push them a bit further - testing with > > 2/8/16gb buffers (DirectMemory is about handling huge quantities of RAM, > > after all) > > > > Ciao, > > R > > > > On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 4:19 PM, Daniel Manzke < > [email protected] > >> wrote: > > > >> I think there is more need for benchmarks. > >> > >> Benchmarks: > >> - read only with a filled cache > >> - read/write in different scenarios (80/20,60/40,40/60,20/80) > >> - read/write with different values sizes (1, 10, 100kb and file sizes > like > >> 1,5,100mb) > >> - concurrency benchmarks > >> - requesting the same value > >> - writing the same value > >> - writing while requesting it > >> - ... > >> > >> > >> Bye, > >> Daniel > >> > >> 2012/2/20 Simone Tripodi <[email protected]> > >> > >> > Hi all guys, > >> > > >> > a lot of new ideas and contributions have joined DM in the last days - > >> > and thanks all for participating, that means that the community is > >> > healthy! :) - I would encourage anyway you all on closing some pending > >> > arguments, before that discussions arrive to nowhere. > >> > > >> > I tried to put (almost, apologize in advance if I forgot something, > >> > that was not intentional!) all of them in a kind of "priority queue" > >> > > >> > on core module: > >> > > >> > * as Daniel suggested on JIRA, put/update methods shall be unified, a > >> > la java.util.Map#put(K, V); > >> > * as Daniel suggested on JIRA, Serializers have to (de)serialize > >> > directly on/to ByteBuffer instances, rather than manipulating byte[]; > >> > * access directly to the stored ByteBuffer: actually current impl is > >> > a turnaround that created a little of confusion on the following > >> > point; > >> > * Generics: there is the general agreement to have a Cache<K, V>; > >> > * Michael suggested concurrency and lower level stuff, hopefully will > >> > contribute some patches; > >> > * APIs: couldn't resist, actual signatures are IMHO confusing (the > >> > order matters!) so a decision has to be taken to switch or not to > >> > fluent APIs, or at least review the original one. > >> > > >> > plugins/integrations > >> > > >> > * Karaf: Ioannis is taking care of it; > >> > * Solr: I was no longer able to run it on my local machine, I hope > >> > TomNaso will have some spare time to help; > >> > * EHCache: fine, still to be imported (subjected to core > modifications) > >> ; > >> > * more serializers: Kryo, ..., for benchmarks (?!?); > >> > * Olivier's REST server (in progress). > >> > > >> > Does it look complete? > >> > > >> > TIA, > >> > Simo > >> > > >> > http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ > >> > http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/ > >> > http://twitter.com/simonetripodi > >> > http://www.99soft.org/ > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Viele Grüße/Best Regards > >> > >> Daniel Manzke > >> > > > > -- > sent from my Nokia 3210 > -- Viele Grüße/Best Regards Daniel Manzke
