Any idea about these low performances?
Il giorno lunedì 19 maggio 2014 19:41:05 UTC+2, Angelo Immediata ha scritto:
>
> Hi there
>
> We are using Neo4j 2.0.3 in order to build a routing system. We are using
> the classical A Start implementation, tough we saw that there is a
> TraversalAstar implementation but it seems to be in experimental status yet.
>
> By the way, we read an OSM file and create our graph; actually we have
> around 1 million of points. around 2 million of relationships and around 5
> million of properites on relationships; by reading neo4j documentation it
> seems to me that this DB dimension is really small and it's really well
> handled by neo4j but in my case this doesn't seem to be real (maybe I'm
> missing something)
>
> Actually our node creation code is the following one:
>
> private long createGraphNode(OsmNodeWrapper osmNodeWrapper)
> {
> try
> {
> Map<String, Object> nodeProps = new HashMap<String, Object>();
> double x = osmNodeWrapper.getLongitude();
> double y = osmNodeWrapper.getLatitude();
> nodeProps.put(OSMAttribute.LATITUDE_PROPERTY, y);
> nodeProps.put(OSMAttribute.LONGITUDE_PROPERTY, x);
> nodeProps.put(OSMAttribute.OSM_NODE_ID_PROPERTY, osmNodeWrapper.
> getOsmNodeId());
> if (osmNodeWrapper.isTrafficSignal())
> nodeProps.put(OSMAttribute.TRAFFIC_SIGNAL, true);
> // Creo il nodo
> long graphNodeId = inserter.createNode(nodeProps, mainNodeLabel);
> // aggiungo l'identificativo del nodo sul grafo
> osmNodeWrapper.setGraphNodeId(graphNodeId);
> return graphNodeId;
> }
>
> In our graph, we have only 2 types of relationships:
>
> - *CAR_ONE_WAY_RELATION* for one way road with Direction OUTCOMING
> - *CAR_BIDIRECTIONAL_WAY_RELATION* for bidirectional road with
> Direction BOTH
>
> This is the relationship creation code:
> //Create RelationShip
> Map<String, Object> relationProps = new HashMap<String, Object>();
> relationProps.put(OSMAttribute.EDGE_LENGTH_PROPERTY, lunghezzaArco);
> ....//other properties
> long relId = inserter.createRelationship(startNode, endNode,
> "CAR_ONE_WAY_RELATION", relationProps);
>
> osmWayIdPropertyIndex.add(relId, relationProps)
>
> We configured the neo4j embedded by using the following parameters:
>
> neostore.nodestore.db.mapped_memory=100M
> neostore.relationshipstore.db.mapped_memory=3G
> neostore.propertystore.db.mapped_memory=100M
> neostore.propertystore.db.strings.mapped_memory=200M
> neostore.propertystore.db.arrays.mapped_memory=50M
> cache_type=strong
>
> As you can see we use a strong cache type; this means we cache all data in
> memory. Moreover when out application starts we load all nodes and
> properties in memory; n order to do this we use this code:
>
>
> private void loadWholeGraphInMemory() throws PinfGraphServiceException{
> StopWatch sw = new StopWatch();
> sw.start();
> Node start;
> for ( Node n : ggo.getAllNodes() ) {
> n.getPropertyKeys();
> for ( Relationship relationship : n.getRelationships() ) {
> start = relationship.getStartNode();
> }
> }
> for ( Relationship r : ggo.getAllRelationships() ) {
> start = r.getStartNode();
> r.getPropertyKeys();
> }
> sw.stop();
> logger.info("Grafo caricato in "+sw.getLastTaskTimeMillis()+" millis");
>
>
> }
>
> We tried to execute the AStar algorithm between 2 points. The distance
> between points is around 130 kilometers. In order to execute the algorithm
> Neo4j takes around 4 seconds for returning a path and it seems to me really
> too much; if i compare it to other software on the same OSM I have really
> really really really different performance.
> Is there any way to improve the Algorithm performance? Where can we act to
> have better performance? would be better to use the Traversal AStar?
> Moreover is there any plan to implement bi-directional AStar and/or
> Dijkstra?
>
> I guess that with this kind of perfomance, Neo4j is not suitable for my
> scenario
>
> Thank you
> Angelo
>
>
>
>
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Neo4j" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to neo4j+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
