Re: Ignite Write Behind performance

2016-06-09 Thread amitpa
We use it to conservative 2 now in our current setting -- View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Ignite-Write-Behind-performance-tp5385p5549.html Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: Ignite Write Behind performance

2016-06-08 Thread bintisepaha
Thanks for that. we were setting flushsize to 0. how about flush thread count? -- View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Ignite-Write-Behind-performance-tp5385p5541.html Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: Ignite Write Behind performance

2016-06-06 Thread amitpa
I did test this...For us I think Write behind gets called fine. -- View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Ignite-Write-Behind-performance-tp5385p5475.html Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: Ignite Write Behind performance

2016-06-06 Thread bintisepaha
that? -- View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Ignite-Write-Behind-performance-tp5385p5470.html Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: Ignite Write Behind performance

2016-06-04 Thread amitpa
Thanks we are considering implementing JDBC batch inserts -- View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Ignite-Write-Behind-performance-tp5385p5418.html Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: Ignite Write Behind performance

2016-06-03 Thread Alexey Goncharuk
gt; > What I mean is :- > > Shouldnt the write behind use a separete thread pool so that slow write > behind process does not impact the whole grid ? > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Ignite-Write-Behind-performan

Re: Ignite Write Behind performance

2016-06-03 Thread amitpa
I understood this perfectly. What I mean is :- Shouldnt the write behind use a separete thread pool so that slow write behind process does not impact the whole grid ? -- View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Ignite-Write-Behind-performance-tp5385p5412

Re: Ignite Write Behind performance

2016-06-03 Thread Denis Magda
the cost of slow disk IO. > I understand that theres a limit, but shouldnt this thread pool be different > if technically possible, allowing ignite to continue processing in case of > slow write behind performance. > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://ap

Re: Ignite Write Behind performance

2016-06-03 Thread amitpa
ignite to continue processing in case of slow write behind performance. -- View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Ignite-Write-Behind-performance-tp5385p5400.html Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: Ignite Write Behind performance

2016-06-02 Thread Denis Magda
write behind mode. > > What should be my system threadpool size assuming I have two caches which > participate in transactions and 2 nodes in 10G network. > > > > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nab

Ignite Write Behind performance

2016-06-02 Thread amitpa
://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Ignite-Write-Behind-performance-tp5385.html Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.