+1 on this multilayer, but could be on "contrib" and not on core.
2012/2/20 Daniel Manzke <[email protected]>: > 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 -- sent from my Nokia 3210
