Some findings...
I have added some counters in the code (ahhh, 24 years back in the past,
when I was adding printlf() in my C code ;).
Here is what I found :
- most of the time is consumed in the CachedRecordManager.update()
method, which calls BaseRecordManager.update( long recid, Object obj
On 5/11/10 11:53 AM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 11:03 AM, Alex Karasuluwrote:
Hi Emmanuel,
I modified a test and the JdbmTable implementation to expose exactly which
data structure is being used and make sure the switch occurs at the
appropriate time. The tests really were not
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 11:03 AM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 11:51 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
>
>> Hi Emmanuel,
>>
>> On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 5:40 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> while doing some perf test on the Add operation, I'm getting blocked
>>> after havi
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 11:31 AM, Emmanuel Lécharny wrote:
> On 5/10/10 10:03 AM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
>
>>
>> I'm starting to look into the switch over to using secondary BTree's for
>> duplicates after the threshold is reached to make sure this is working
>> properly. I remember having a hard t
On 5/10/10 10:03 AM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
I'm starting to look into the switch over to using secondary BTree's for
duplicates after the threshold is reached to make sure this is working
properly. I remember having a hard time writing a test case to make sure
that this switch over occurs before
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 11:51 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
> Hi Emmanuel,
>
> On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 5:40 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> while doing some perf test on the Add operation, I'm getting blocked after
>> having added around 3800 entries. After investigations, I found that some
Hi Emmanuel,
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 5:40 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny wrote:
> Hi,
>
> while doing some perf test on the Add operation, I'm getting blocked after
> having added around 3800 entries. After investigations, I found that some
> index are very expensive to update :
> - the ObjectClass index q
>> Welcome to my nightmare. ;)
I'm still looking for a fast/cheap index data structure that can be
sparsely populated, is lossless, and scales to billions of entries.
(Currently our index is fast/cheap but lossy. If you fill a slot with a
million entries and then remove every other one, it
Emmanuel Lecharny wrote:
Hi,
while doing some perf test on the Add operation, I'm getting blocked
after having added around 3800 entries. After investigations, I found
that some index are very expensive to update :
- the ObjectClass index quickly get saturated, and adding a new entry
into it cos
Hi,
while doing some perf test on the Add operation, I'm getting blocked
after having added around 3800 entries. After investigations, I found
that some index are very expensive to update :
- the ObjectClass index quickly get saturated, and adding a new entry
into it cost a hell of a time.
-
10 matches
Mail list logo
