[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLUME-1189?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Brock Noland updated FLUME-1189:
--------------------------------
Attachment: FileVsRecoverableMemory.java
I ran the attached and unless my test is flawed, it appears FileChannel is just
as fast or faster than RecoverableMemoryChannel. Additionally, there is no disk
space savings for RecoverableMemoryChannel or any other benefit of
RecoverableMemoryChannel over FileChannel.
As such I feel we should delete RecoverableMemoryChannel.
The test had multiple threads put/get 40K events, the timings are below:
File 18336ms
RecoverableMemory 25845ms
> Test ReoverableMemoryChannel throughput versus FileChannel
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: FLUME-1189
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLUME-1189
> Project: Flume
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: Channel
> Affects Versions: v1.2.0
> Reporter: Brock Noland
> Attachments: FileVsRecoverableMemory.java
>
>
> I wrote both ReoverableMemoryChannel and FileChannel and the main difference
> between the two is that ReoverableMemoryChannel wraps MemoryChannel and as
> such has a very limited capacity while FileChannel uses the OS file cache to
> keep events in memory. I am not sure that ReoverableMemoryChannel has a much
> greater throughput than FileChannel and if not, then I think we should remove
> ReoverableMemoryChannel.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
