[jira] [Commented] (IGNITE-11857) Investigate performance drop after IGNITE-10078
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11857?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16989896#comment-16989896 ] Alexei Scherbakov commented on IGNITE-11857: [~alex_pl] Ok, let's proceed with Map version. > Investigate performance drop after IGNITE-10078 > --- > > Key: IGNITE-11857 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11857 > Project: Ignite > Issue Type: Improvement >Reporter: Alexei Scherbakov >Assignee: Aleksey Plekhanov >Priority: Major > Attachments: ignite-config.xml, > run.properties.tx-optimistic-put-b-backup > > Time Spent: 20m > Remaining Estimate: 0h > > After IGNITE-10078 yardstick tests show performance drop up to 8% in some > scenarios: > * tx-optim-repRead-put-get > * tx-optimistic-put > * tx-putAll > Partially this is due new update counter implementation, but not only. > Investigation is required. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.3.4#803005)
[jira] [Commented] (IGNITE-11857) Investigate performance drop after IGNITE-10078
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11857?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16989854#comment-16989854
]
Aleksey Plekhanov commented on IGNITE-11857:
[~ascherbakov]
We can only change the type from {{long}} to {{int}} for delta values. There is
no boxing for delta values in the code.
Resident size for both structures is also relatively low.
{code:java}
System.out.println("Size: " +
GraphLayout.parseInstance(benchmark.partCntr).totalSize())
{code}
Old implementation: 1752 bytes
TreeMap (long delta): 2248 bytes
TreeMap (int delta): 2072 bytes
TreeMap: 1816 bytes
Even if we have 100 cache groups with 1000 partitions on each node it's about
30-50 extra megabytes of heap.
This test is synthetic, in real production cases I think there will be much
lower values.
TreeMap with int delta has a little drop compared to long deltas and map of
has a little drop compared to int deltas.
Overall comparison table:
||Implementation||Throughput||GC pressure||Footprint||
|Old implementation|4,338 ± 0,208 ops/us|25 182 056|1752|
|TreeMap (long delta)|6,089 ± 0,459 ops/us|11 828 272|2248|
|TreeMap (long delta)|5,905 ± 0,338 ops/us|11 436 760|2072|
|TreeMap|4,857 ± 0,318 ops/us|10 733 888|1816|
I think we should get "TreeMap (long delta)" version. What do you
think?
> Investigate performance drop after IGNITE-10078
> ---
>
> Key: IGNITE-11857
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11857
> Project: Ignite
> Issue Type: Improvement
>Reporter: Alexei Scherbakov
>Assignee: Aleksey Plekhanov
>Priority: Major
> Attachments: ignite-config.xml,
> run.properties.tx-optimistic-put-b-backup
>
> Time Spent: 20m
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> After IGNITE-10078 yardstick tests show performance drop up to 8% in some
> scenarios:
> * tx-optim-repRead-put-get
> * tx-optimistic-put
> * tx-putAll
> Partially this is due new update counter implementation, but not only.
> Investigation is required.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
[jira] [Commented] (IGNITE-11857) Investigate performance drop after IGNITE-10078
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11857?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16989717#comment-16989717 ] Alexei Scherbakov commented on IGNITE-11857: [~alex_pl] You have only measured heap allocation (GC pressure) which seems to be very low for both implementation. You also should measure resident size of both structures. Long for value can be replaced with Integer because no tx with batch of size Integer.MAX_VALUE is viable. For most frequent use cases object creation will be handled by Integer boxing cache. I think I'm ok this proposed improvement, just make sure we couldn't do better. > Investigate performance drop after IGNITE-10078 > --- > > Key: IGNITE-11857 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11857 > Project: Ignite > Issue Type: Improvement >Reporter: Alexei Scherbakov >Assignee: Aleksey Plekhanov >Priority: Major > Attachments: ignite-config.xml, > run.properties.tx-optimistic-put-b-backup > > Time Spent: 20m > Remaining Estimate: 0h > > After IGNITE-10078 yardstick tests show performance drop up to 8% in some > scenarios: > * tx-optim-repRead-put-get > * tx-optimistic-put > * tx-putAll > Partially this is due new update counter implementation, but not only. > Investigation is required. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.3.4#803005)
[jira] [Commented] (IGNITE-11857) Investigate performance drop after IGNITE-10078
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11857?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16989651#comment-16989651 ] Aleksey Plekhanov commented on IGNITE-11857: About 2.8, agreed with you, should be merged to master (2.8 already has own branch). > Investigate performance drop after IGNITE-10078 > --- > > Key: IGNITE-11857 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11857 > Project: Ignite > Issue Type: Improvement >Reporter: Alexei Scherbakov >Assignee: Aleksey Plekhanov >Priority: Major > Attachments: ignite-config.xml, > run.properties.tx-optimistic-put-b-backup > > Time Spent: 20m > Remaining Estimate: 0h > > After IGNITE-10078 yardstick tests show performance drop up to 8% in some > scenarios: > * tx-optim-repRead-put-get > * tx-optimistic-put > * tx-putAll > Partially this is due new update counter implementation, but not only. > Investigation is required. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.3.4#803005)
[jira] [Commented] (IGNITE-11857) Investigate performance drop after IGNITE-10078
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11857?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16989606#comment-16989606
]
Aleksey Plekhanov commented on IGNITE-11857:
[~ascherbakov],
If we get rid of {{Item}} class, there will be a new {{Long}} object created
each time we merge sequence with previous. With {{Item}} class we can just add
delta to the old object. Sorted array of primitive tuples will get a drop on
remove/add items to the middle of the array. Bitmaps in some cases will consume
too much memory, the amount of memory depends on the difference between LWM and
HWM (instead of a count of gaps). Also, I'm not sure about the performance
boost in case of bitmaps usage. The current implementation is less risky, we
can't get drop on some unpredictable place.
New solution use less heap. There is no {{tailSet}} and {{headSet}} methods
usage. These methods allocate new objects for new {{Set}}s.
I've test heap allocation using this code:
{code:java}
JmhPartitionUpdateCounterBenchmark benchmark = new
JmhPartitionUpdateCounterBenchmark();
benchmark.setup();
ThreadMXBean bean = (ThreadMXBean)ManagementFactory.getThreadMXBean();
long allocated0 = bean.getThreadAllocatedBytes(Thread.currentThread().getId());
for (int i = 0; i < 100_000; i++)
benchmark.updateWithGap();
long allocated1 = bean.getThreadAllocatedBytes(Thread.currentThread().getId());
System.out.println("Memory allocated: " + (allocated1 - allocated0));
{code}
Results:
Old implementation: 25 181 680 bytes
New implementation: 11 828 272 bytes
> Investigate performance drop after IGNITE-10078
> ---
>
> Key: IGNITE-11857
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11857
> Project: Ignite
> Issue Type: Improvement
>Reporter: Alexei Scherbakov
>Assignee: Aleksey Plekhanov
>Priority: Major
> Attachments: ignite-config.xml,
> run.properties.tx-optimistic-put-b-backup
>
> Time Spent: 20m
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> After IGNITE-10078 yardstick tests show performance drop up to 8% in some
> scenarios:
> * tx-optim-repRead-put-get
> * tx-optimistic-put
> * tx-putAll
> Partially this is due new update counter implementation, but not only.
> Investigation is required.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
[jira] [Commented] (IGNITE-11857) Investigate performance drop after IGNITE-10078
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11857?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16989525#comment-16989525 ] Alexei Scherbakov commented on IGNITE-11857: [~alex_pl] I've looked at your contribution. Changing TreeSet to TreeMap looks like a very minor change. I think you can go further and get rid of Item class. Out of order updates can be kept in SortedMap where key is a start and value is a range (or even in sorted array of primitive tuples). Another possibility is storing missing updates in a bitmap. You should also check a new solution for heap usage in comparison to the old. For many partitions configurations less heap usage could be more significant advantage other the minor performance boost. Also I have a little concern about the robustness of a fix. It might be risky to merge it to 2.8 without extensive testing. So, I would postpone the change and improved the patch first. > Investigate performance drop after IGNITE-10078 > --- > > Key: IGNITE-11857 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11857 > Project: Ignite > Issue Type: Improvement >Reporter: Alexei Scherbakov >Assignee: Aleksey Plekhanov >Priority: Major > Attachments: ignite-config.xml, > run.properties.tx-optimistic-put-b-backup > > Time Spent: 20m > Remaining Estimate: 0h > > After IGNITE-10078 yardstick tests show performance drop up to 8% in some > scenarios: > * tx-optim-repRead-put-get > * tx-optimistic-put > * tx-putAll > Partially this is due new update counter implementation, but not only. > Investigation is required. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.3.4#803005)
[jira] [Commented] (IGNITE-11857) Investigate performance drop after IGNITE-10078
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11857?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16988908#comment-16988908 ] Aleksey Plekhanov commented on IGNITE-11857: I've rebased the PR [https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/6686] and resolved merge conflicts. > Investigate performance drop after IGNITE-10078 > --- > > Key: IGNITE-11857 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11857 > Project: Ignite > Issue Type: Improvement >Reporter: Alexei Scherbakov >Assignee: Aleksey Plekhanov >Priority: Major > Attachments: ignite-config.xml, > run.properties.tx-optimistic-put-b-backup > > Time Spent: 20m > Remaining Estimate: 0h > > After IGNITE-10078 yardstick tests show performance drop up to 8% in some > scenarios: > * tx-optim-repRead-put-get > * tx-optimistic-put > * tx-putAll > Partially this is due new update counter implementation, but not only. > Investigation is required. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.3.4#803005)
[jira] [Commented] (IGNITE-11857) Investigate performance drop after IGNITE-10078
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11857?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16988906#comment-16988906
]
Ignite TC Bot commented on IGNITE-11857:
{panel:title=Branch: [pull/6686/head] Base: [master] : No blockers
found!|borderStyle=dashed|borderColor=#ccc|titleBGColor=#D6F7C1}{panel}
[TeamCity *-- Run :: All*
Results|https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=4812258buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_RunAll]
> Investigate performance drop after IGNITE-10078
> ---
>
> Key: IGNITE-11857
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11857
> Project: Ignite
> Issue Type: Improvement
>Reporter: Alexei Scherbakov
>Assignee: Aleksey Plekhanov
>Priority: Major
> Attachments: ignite-config.xml,
> run.properties.tx-optimistic-put-b-backup
>
> Time Spent: 20m
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> After IGNITE-10078 yardstick tests show performance drop up to 8% in some
> scenarios:
> * tx-optim-repRead-put-get
> * tx-optimistic-put
> * tx-putAll
> Partially this is due new update counter implementation, but not only.
> Investigation is required.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
[jira] [Commented] (IGNITE-11857) Investigate performance drop after IGNITE-10078
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11857?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16918035#comment-16918035 ] Alexei Scherbakov commented on IGNITE-11857: [~alex_pl] Haven't yet, but it's in my queue. > Investigate performance drop after IGNITE-10078 > --- > > Key: IGNITE-11857 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11857 > Project: Ignite > Issue Type: Improvement >Reporter: Alexei Scherbakov >Assignee: Aleksey Plekhanov >Priority: Major > Attachments: ignite-config.xml, > run.properties.tx-optimistic-put-b-backup > > Time Spent: 20m > Remaining Estimate: 0h > > After IGNITE-10078 yardstick tests show performance drop up to 8% in some > scenarios: > * tx-optim-repRead-put-get > * tx-optimistic-put > * tx-putAll > Partially this is due new update counter implementation, but not only. > Investigation is required. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.3.2#803003)
[jira] [Commented] (IGNITE-11857) Investigate performance drop after IGNITE-10078
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11857?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16916759#comment-16916759 ] Aleksey Plekhanov commented on IGNITE-11857: [~ascherbakov], Do you have a chance to review the ticket? > Investigate performance drop after IGNITE-10078 > --- > > Key: IGNITE-11857 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11857 > Project: Ignite > Issue Type: Improvement >Reporter: Alexei Scherbakov >Assignee: Aleksey Plekhanov >Priority: Major > Attachments: ignite-config.xml, > run.properties.tx-optimistic-put-b-backup > > Time Spent: 20m > Remaining Estimate: 0h > > After IGNITE-10078 yardstick tests show performance drop up to 8% in some > scenarios: > * tx-optim-repRead-put-get > * tx-optimistic-put > * tx-putAll > Partially this is due new update counter implementation, but not only. > Investigation is required. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.3.2#803003)
[jira] [Commented] (IGNITE-11857) Investigate performance drop after IGNITE-10078
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11857?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16898804#comment-16898804 ] Alexei Scherbakov commented on IGNITE-11857: [~alex_pl], I will take a look in nearest couple of days. > Investigate performance drop after IGNITE-10078 > --- > > Key: IGNITE-11857 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11857 > Project: Ignite > Issue Type: Improvement >Reporter: Alexei Scherbakov >Assignee: Aleksey Plekhanov >Priority: Major > Attachments: ignite-config.xml, > run.properties.tx-optimistic-put-b-backup > > Time Spent: 20m > Remaining Estimate: 0h > > After IGNITE-10078 yardstick tests show performance drop up to 8% in some > scenarios: > * tx-optim-repRead-put-get > * tx-optimistic-put > * tx-putAll > Partially this is due new update counter implementation, but not only. > Investigation is required. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.14#76016)
[jira] [Commented] (IGNITE-11857) Investigate performance drop after IGNITE-10078
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11857?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16898800#comment-16898800 ] Aleksey Plekhanov commented on IGNITE-11857: [~ustas] thanks for the benchmark. Seems like we have a little improvement here compared to e7a90a445. [~ascherbakov] could you please have a look at the patch? > Investigate performance drop after IGNITE-10078 > --- > > Key: IGNITE-11857 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11857 > Project: Ignite > Issue Type: Improvement >Reporter: Alexei Scherbakov >Assignee: Aleksey Plekhanov >Priority: Major > Attachments: ignite-config.xml, > run.properties.tx-optimistic-put-b-backup > > Time Spent: 20m > Remaining Estimate: 0h > > After IGNITE-10078 yardstick tests show performance drop up to 8% in some > scenarios: > * tx-optim-repRead-put-get > * tx-optimistic-put > * tx-putAll > Partially this is due new update counter implementation, but not only. > Investigation is required. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.14#76016)
[jira] [Commented] (IGNITE-11857) Investigate performance drop after IGNITE-10078
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11857?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16897892#comment-16897892 ] Ilya Suntsov commented on IGNITE-11857: --- [~alex_pl] the last run showed that PR 6640 ~ 4 % slower than master. > Investigate performance drop after IGNITE-10078 > --- > > Key: IGNITE-11857 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11857 > Project: Ignite > Issue Type: Improvement >Reporter: Alexei Scherbakov >Assignee: Aleksey Plekhanov >Priority: Major > Attachments: ignite-config.xml, > run.properties.tx-optimistic-put-b-backup > > Time Spent: 20m > Remaining Estimate: 0h > > After IGNITE-10078 yardstick tests show performance drop up to 8% in some > scenarios: > * tx-optim-repRead-put-get > * tx-optimistic-put > * tx-putAll > Partially this is due new update counter implementation, but not only. > Investigation is required. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.14#76016)
[jira] [Commented] (IGNITE-11857) Investigate performance drop after IGNITE-10078
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11857?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16884316#comment-16884316
]
Ignite TC Bot commented on IGNITE-11857:
{panel:title=-- Run :: All: No blockers
found!|borderStyle=dashed|borderColor=#ccc|titleBGColor=#D6F7C1}{panel}
[TeamCity *-- Run :: All*
Results|https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=4318209buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_RunAll]
> Investigate performance drop after IGNITE-10078
> ---
>
> Key: IGNITE-11857
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11857
> Project: Ignite
> Issue Type: Improvement
>Reporter: Alexei Scherbakov
>Assignee: Aleksey Plekhanov
>Priority: Major
> Attachments: ignite-config.xml,
> run.properties.tx-optimistic-put-b-backup
>
> Time Spent: 20m
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> After IGNITE-10078 yardstick tests show performance drop up to 8% in some
> scenarios:
> * tx-optim-repRead-put-get
> * tx-optimistic-put
> * tx-putAll
> Partially this is due new update counter implementation, but not only.
> Investigation is required.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.14#76016)
[jira] [Commented] (IGNITE-11857) Investigate performance drop after IGNITE-10078
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11857?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16872422#comment-16872422
]
Aleksey Plekhanov commented on IGNITE-11857:
I still can't reproduce a performance drop on my environment. Maximum I can get
is 1% drop on introduced for not MVCC transactions method
{{IgniteTxHandler#applyPartitionsUpdatesCounters}}.
So, I've tried to optimize {{PartitionTxUpdateCounterImpl#update(long, long)}}
and now this method about 1.3-1.5 times faster (according to microbenchmarks).
This method is synchronized. I've tried to get rid of the synchronized block
and preserve thread safety but this doesn't give any performance boost while
bringing extra complexity to the code. Seems like contention is not a problem
here.
Also, I've fixed some usages of write entries and read entries collections.
These collections are predicate views and {{F.isEmpty()}} on a collection leads
to undesirable iteration over collection sometimes.
But both these optimizations give no more than 0.5% on my environment.
[~ustas] can you check PR [1] against commit b87bea8 on your environment?
[~ascherbakov] cant you review partition update counter fix?
[1]: [https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/6640]
> Investigate performance drop after IGNITE-10078
> ---
>
> Key: IGNITE-11857
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11857
> Project: Ignite
> Issue Type: Improvement
>Reporter: Alexei Scherbakov
>Assignee: Aleksey Plekhanov
>Priority: Major
> Attachments: ignite-config.xml,
> run.properties.tx-optimistic-put-b-backup
>
> Time Spent: 10m
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> After IGNITE-10078 yardstick tests show performance drop up to 8% in some
> scenarios:
> * tx-optim-repRead-put-get
> * tx-optimistic-put
> * tx-putAll
> Partially this is due new update counter implementation, but not only.
> Investigation is required.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Commented] (IGNITE-11857) Investigate performance drop after IGNITE-10078
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11857?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16858058#comment-16858058
]
Ilya Suntsov commented on IGNITE-11857:
---
[~alex_pl] the most serious performance drop (b87bea84 better than e7a90a445)
I've noticed in the following cases (3 runs for each commit):
{noformat}
BACKGROUND PRIMARY_SYNC
master-b87bea84 master-e7a90a445
33659.00 31587.10 -6.16%
33970.00 32298.80 -4.92%
33813.20 32314.70 -4.43%
BACKGROUND FULL_SYNC
master-b87bea84 master-e7a90a445
33465.20 32396.30 -3.19%
33838.50 32468.20 -4.05%
33754.20 31815.90 -5.74%
LOG_ONLY PRIMARY_SYNC
master-b87bea84 master-e7a90a445
33822.30 32482.20 -3.96%
33957.30 31605.20 -6.93%
33588.60 31956.20 -4.86%
{noformat}
> Investigate performance drop after IGNITE-10078
> ---
>
> Key: IGNITE-11857
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11857
> Project: Ignite
> Issue Type: Improvement
>Reporter: Alexei Scherbakov
>Assignee: Aleksey Plekhanov
>Priority: Major
> Attachments: ignite-config.xml,
> run.properties.tx-optimistic-put-b-backup
>
>
> After IGNITE-10078 yardstick tests show performance drop up to 8% in some
> scenarios:
> * tx-optim-repRead-put-get
> * tx-optimistic-put
> * tx-putAll
> Partially this is due new update counter implementation, but not only.
> Investigation is required.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Commented] (IGNITE-11857) Investigate performance drop after IGNITE-10078
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11857?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16856759#comment-16856759 ] Aleksey Plekhanov commented on IGNITE-11857: [~ustas], [~ascherbakov] do you have any new results? What branches have you compared when getting performance drop? > Investigate performance drop after IGNITE-10078 > --- > > Key: IGNITE-11857 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11857 > Project: Ignite > Issue Type: Improvement >Reporter: Alexei Scherbakov >Assignee: Aleksey Plekhanov >Priority: Major > Attachments: ignite-config.xml, > run.properties.tx-optimistic-put-b-backup > > > After IGNITE-10078 yardstick tests show performance drop up to 8% in some > scenarios: > * tx-optim-repRead-put-get > * tx-optimistic-put > * tx-putAll > Partially this is due new update counter implementation, but not only. > Investigation is required. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Commented] (IGNITE-11857) Investigate performance drop after IGNITE-10078
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11857?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16853058#comment-16853058 ] Aleksey Plekhanov commented on IGNITE-11857: [~ustas] I've benchmarked IgnitePutTxImplicitBenchmark with exactly your parameters on two commits ([1] and [2]), but again didn't get any significant performance drop. Can you double check your results? [1]: [https://github.com/apache/ignite/commit/e7a90a445f09b0783918a0b5cfbeddee7102c45e] [2]: [https://github.com/apache/ignite/commit/b87bea845565394dd051a42cc097acd881cff1cf] > Investigate performance drop after IGNITE-10078 > --- > > Key: IGNITE-11857 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11857 > Project: Ignite > Issue Type: Improvement >Reporter: Alexei Scherbakov >Assignee: Aleksey Plekhanov >Priority: Major > Attachments: ignite-config.xml, > run.properties.tx-optimistic-put-b-backup > > > After IGNITE-10078 yardstick tests show performance drop up to 8% in some > scenarios: > * tx-optim-repRead-put-get > * tx-optimistic-put > * tx-putAll > Partially this is due new update counter implementation, but not only. > Investigation is required. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Commented] (IGNITE-11857) Investigate performance drop after IGNITE-10078
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11857?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16852897#comment-16852897 ] Ilya Suntsov commented on IGNITE-11857: --- [~alex_pl] I've attached configs. > Investigate performance drop after IGNITE-10078 > --- > > Key: IGNITE-11857 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11857 > Project: Ignite > Issue Type: Improvement >Reporter: Alexei Scherbakov >Assignee: Aleksey Plekhanov >Priority: Major > Attachments: ignite-config.xml, > run.properties.tx-optimistic-put-b-backup > > > After IGNITE-10078 yardstick tests show performance drop up to 8% in some > scenarios: > * tx-optim-repRead-put-get > * tx-optimistic-put > * tx-putAll > Partially this is due new update counter implementation, but not only. > Investigation is required. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Commented] (IGNITE-11857) Investigate performance drop after IGNITE-10078
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11857?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16852833#comment-16852833 ] Aleksey Plekhanov commented on IGNITE-11857: [~ascherbakov] can you provide full parameters (benchmark.properties and ignite-config.xml files) of scenarios where you got a performance drop? I've run some benchmarks with these scenarios but didn't see any notable performance drop. Also, I've profiled code with different ignite/cache/transactions settings and again didn't get any drop. According to my measures, new counters implementation is not resource-consuming and transaction spend no more than 0.5% of the time in "update counter" methods. > Investigate performance drop after IGNITE-10078 > --- > > Key: IGNITE-11857 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11857 > Project: Ignite > Issue Type: Improvement >Reporter: Alexei Scherbakov >Assignee: Aleksey Plekhanov >Priority: Major > > After IGNITE-10078 yardstick tests show performance drop up to 8% in some > scenarios: > * tx-optim-repRead-put-get > * tx-optimistic-put > * tx-putAll > Partially this is due new update counter implementation, but not only. > Investigation is required. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)
