I also doubt that is the source of the contention.
How expensive the selection queue depends on the OS and chosen selector.
The Windows selector is probably the most expensive. Socket writes are 3x
more costly there than on Ubuntu.
On Aug 15, 2014 5:28 PM, "Emmanuel Lécharny" wrote:
> Le 15/08/1
Le 15/08/14 16:06, Jon V. a écrit :
> If you receive 5 bytes then Mina will trigger through the schedule
> mechanism which means it gets queued and a thread wakes up to process that.
> That wakeup is one of the most expensive parts of the process. How often
> Mina wakes up is defined by how the pro
If you receive 5 bytes then Mina will trigger through the schedule
mechanism which means it gets queued and a thread wakes up to process that.
That wakeup is one of the most expensive parts of the process. How often
Mina wakes up is defined by how the producer is writing data to the
socket.
As for
Le 15/08/14 08:32, Quah Kean Jin a écrit :
> what do you do on the server side with the data you
> receive ?
> Jin > I will parse the XML and store in to database but for my current
> testing I have taken out all those. Now just left this line in
> messageReceived() method: logger.info( "###>>> Rec
Le 15/08/14 08:22, Alexander Christian a écrit :
> Am 15.08.2014 08:15, schrieb Jon V.:
>> Yes, if the iohandle is blocking the execution then that would
>> obviously do
>> it That said I am not sure how the reactor threading in Mina would
>> handle
>> very small messages sent in a way that preve
Le 15/08/14 08:15, Jon V. a écrit :
> Yes, if the iohandle is blocking the execution then that would obviously do
> it That said I am not sure how the reactor threading in Mina would handle
> very small messages sent in a way that prevents the data from aggregating.
> Difference is 20k individual
