In fact this test shows 3 problems: 1. Bad scalabity even with embedded server: H2 can't use more then 10% of PU due to locking 2. Slow TCP exchange even with localhost 3. Degradation of TCP server performance, probably due to a leak
I would very appreciate your input for each of the problems My final goal - 2000 tps with TCP server. Each transaction includes approx. 10 inserts, 10 updates by primary key, 50 short selects. Database size >1TB. CPU cores are not limited, we can have 30-100 cores Do you think it is achivable? Do you have such experience? On Sunday, December 11, 2016 at 7:41:34 PM UTC, Noel Grandin wrote: > > thanks. > > looks like we are bottlenecking on the locking on the undoLog object in > TransactionStore, particularly in the commit() method. > > I see a comment there > // TODO could synchronize on blocks (100 at a time or so) > which means perhaps Thomas had some ideas how this could be improved. > > Bit late here now, will thank about this more tomorrow. > > Still don't understand why the TCP server is so much slower than direct, > but perhaps it's a combined latenct thingof the locking and the socket > connection limiting the throughput? > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "H2 Database" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to h2-database+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to h2-database@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/h2-database. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
