Thank you both for clarifying this. I usually also have large objects 3KB so
I thought about increasing the page size to 32KB to reduce the number of
pages and thus reduce the speed at which we get to the 2/3 of dirty pages.
Good idea?
On top of that during the process at some I generate a
Evgeniy,
Thanks for clarifying, I completely forgot about this behavior!
-
Denis
On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 5:10 PM Evgenii Zhuravlev
wrote:
> Steve,
>
> Actually, disabling WAL is a good option for your use case. Checkpoint
> mechanism is the same with disabled WAL, the only difference is that
Steve,
Actually, disabling WAL is a good option for your use case. Checkpoint
mechanism is the same with disabled WAL, the only difference is that node
is not writing WAL to the disk on each operation. Usually, it might make
sense to disable WAL for initial loading - when you can lose the data in
Steve,
Please check these generic recommendations if you haven't done so already:
https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/durable-memory-tuning#native-persistence-related-tuning
Otherwise, send us a note if you come across any bottlenecks or issues so
that we can give you more specific
Thanks a lot for the recommendation. So keeping the WAL, disabling archiving.
I understand all records are kept on disk.
Thanks again. Anything else?
--
Sent from: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/
Hi Steve,
I think that you can get a performance hit for your write operations by
disabling the WAL. It serves two purposes in Ignite. The first is the
recovery while the second is fast disk writes. The WAL is an append-only
structure and Ignite can persist changes to disk really quick. If the
Hello,
I am trying to use ignite persistence to "extend" memory. That is to replace
the swap that is not working very well.
Therefore since I do not care about recovery I disabled the WAL. Are there
other things you would recommend to configure to use the ignite persistence
as a sort of swap.
