Hi Andrey,
First of all, my bad. I made one mistake in my benchmark which affected the 
results. So it's not that bad!
I also found that ConcurrentUpdatesTest.concurrentPessimisticSQLUpdates() 
test case is very similar to my case.
I slightly modified it adding opsrate/sec. Available here 
 https://gist.github.com/anonymous/305d33338c9f94c12b55

Based on it I have following results:

v2.1.8
ConcurrentUpdatesTest.concurrentPessimisticSQLUpdates()
private final static int PESSIMISTIC_CYCLES = 10000;
private final static int THREADS            = 12;
Elapsed time [ms]:79284
Rate ops/sec:1513


v2.0.16
ConcurrentUpdatesTest.concurrentPessimisticSQLUpdates()
private final static int PESSIMISTIC_CYCLES = 10000;
private final static int THREADS            = 12;
Elapsed time [ms]:23581
Rate ops/sec:5088


v2.0.8
ConcurrentUpdatesTest.concurrentPessimisticSQLUpdates()
private final static int PESSIMISTIC_CYCLES = 10000;
private final static int THREADS            = 12;
Elapsed time [ms]:17488
Rate ops/sec:6861


Any clue why it is getting slower and slower with each next version? Can 
you or someone confirm similar results?




W dniu piątek, 25 grudnia 2015 19:19:44 UTC+1 użytkownik Pawel K. napisał:
>
> No CME, it's just slower .In that case I rely on pessimistic locking.  Imo 
> the lock is broader/longer?
> Pawel
>
>
>
> W dniu piątek, 25 grudnia 2015 13:08:37 UTC+1 użytkownik Andrey Lomakin 
> napisał:
>>
>> Hi Pawel,
>> Just to make things clear.
>>
>> Do you receive any concurrent modification exceptions or locks merely 
>> become slower ?
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 12:17 AM Pawel K. <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi guys,
>>>
>>> I use OrientDB version 2.0.x. I wanted to migrate to 2.1.x (2.1.8)
>>> After running my internal tests in .NET I realized that the performance 
>>> of sql UPDATE operation is really dramatic.
>>>
>>> One of my test invokes really basic sql operation with pessimistic 
>>> locking
>>>
>>>    UPDATE #13:0 INCREMENT Salary = 1  LOCK RECORD
>>>
>>> in 8-12 threads.
>>>
>>> Orientdb v2.0.16 delivers nice performance on desktop machine
>>>
>>> Rate 8810,57268722467/sec, 10000 objects took 1135ms Threads=8
>>> Rate 9033,42366757001/sec, 10000 objects took 1107ms Threads=9
>>> Rate 8976,66068222621/sec, 10000 objects took 1114ms Threads=9
>>>
>>> wheras v2.1.x
>>>
>>>
>>> ~ 150 ops/sec which basically kills my app.
>>>
>>> Any thoughts?  
>>>
>>> Pawel
>>>
>>> PS. All ALTER/CREATE operations are sooo long now, that all my tests got 
>>> 10x more time to execute.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>>
>>> --- 
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>>> Groups "OrientDB" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
>>> an email to [email protected].
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>
>> -- 
>> Best regards,
>> Andrey Lomakin, R&D lead. 
>> OrientDB Ltd
>>
>> twitter:@Andrey_Lomakin linkedin:https://ua.linkedin.com/in/andreylomakin
>>
>

-- 

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"OrientDB" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to