Interesting results! I've run similar tests with writes (put and delete) and my results indicate that in most situations, multiple async writes will perform better than one batch sync call. I can't think of any reason this wouldn't be the case for reads as well. Are your entities all in different entity groups?
Thanks, Max On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 4:11 PM, Ikai Lan (Google) <ikai.l+gro...@google.com<ikai.l%2bgro...@google.com> > wrote: > Very cool. Thanks for posting! > > What kind of processing are you doing after you retrieve the entities? I'm > surprised it made a difference. > > > -- > Ikai Lan > Developer Programs Engineer, Google App Engine > Blogger: http://googleappengine.blogspot.com > Reddit: http://www.reddit.com/r/appengine > Twitter: http://twitter.com/app_engine > > > > On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 2:48 PM, Gal Dolber <gal.dol...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Even better :) >> >> [image: Screen shot 2010-12-17 at 7.48.44 PM.png] >> >> >> On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 7:31 PM, Gal Dolber <gal.dol...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Here are my results if anyone interested. >>> >>> The idea was splitting a batch into multiple async gets so I could start >>> processing each results while the others were being fetched. >>> With the batch get I need to wait until I get all the results to do the >>> next operations. >>> >>> At the end (on my situation) batching won. >>> * >>> * >>> *Multiple async gets* >>> [image: MultipleAsyncs.png] >>> >>> *Batching* >>> >>> [image: Batch.png] >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 4:48 PM, Gal Dolber <gal.dol...@gmail.com>wrote: >>> >>>> Yes, I am talking about datastore api. >>>> >>>> I made some isolated tests and the batch always wins (no by so much). >>>> >>>> But in my app, when I break the batch into multiple async gets, I can >>>> start processing each async get result (and doing another api calls) >>>> before... and it seems to be perform better. >>>> >>>> I'll keep doing tests and post if find anything interesting. >>>> Thanks! >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 2:42 PM, Ikai Lan (Google) < >>>> ikai.l+gro...@google.com <ikai.l%2bgro...@google.com>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> You're talking about the datastore API? Underneath the hood, >>>>> synchronous gets just make asynchronous calls and block on Future.get() >>>>> anyway. Making a single synchronous batch get would translate to a single >>>>> asynchronous RPC with multiple keys vs. multiple asynchronous get RPCs. I >>>>> suspect the single batch call will perform better from a CPU cost/quota >>>>> perspective, but I'd defer to AppStats benchmarks as the authoritative >>>>> answer. >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Ikai Lan >>>>> Developer Programs Engineer, Google App Engine >>>>> Blogger: http://googleappengine.blogspot.com >>>>> Reddit: http://www.reddit.com/r/appengine >>>>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/app_engine >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 3:38 AM, Gal Dolber <gal.dol...@gmail.com>wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Should I expect the similar performance? or the batch will always be >>>>>> better? >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>> Groups "Google App Engine for Java" group. >>>>>> To post to this group, send email to >>>>>> google-appengine-j...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>>> google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<google-appengine-java%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> >>>>>> . >>>>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>> Groups "Google App Engine for Java" group. >>>>> To post to this group, send email to >>>>> google-appengine-j...@googlegroups.com. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>> google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<google-appengine-java%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> >>>>> . >>>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Guit: Elegant, beautiful, modular and *production ready* gwt >>>> applications. >>>> >>>> http://code.google.com/p/guit/ >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Guit: Elegant, beautiful, modular and *production ready* gwt >>> applications. >>> >>> http://code.google.com/p/guit/ >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Guit: Elegant, beautiful, modular and *production ready* gwt applications. >> >> http://code.google.com/p/guit/ >> >> >> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Google App Engine for Java" group. >> To post to this group, send email to >> google-appengine-j...@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<google-appengine-java%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> >> . >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en. >> > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Google App Engine for Java" group. > To post to this group, send email to > google-appengine-j...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<google-appengine-java%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine for Java" group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine-j...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en.
