Well, we need to take a closer look then. This may be affected by
transaction protocol. Viacheslav Koptilin, can you please create a test and
see what time goes to?
kestas, you can switch to Ignite.compute().affinityCall("key", () ->
{return cacheBinary.get("key").field("f"));}); This should work fine for
both transactional and atomic caches.
Thanks!
--
Yakov Zhdanov, Director R&D
*GridGain Systems*
www.gridgain.com
2017-08-09 16:30 GMT+03:00 kestas <kaln...@gmail.com>:
> I did some testing on #invoke vs #get performance. It works as expected on
> ATOMIC cache, however on TRANSACTIONAL cache #invoke has even lower
> performance than pure #get. Is this to be expected?
>
> simplified code:
> some = cacheBinary.invoke(1,(mutableEntry, objects) ->
> mutableEntry.getValue().field("some"));
> and
> some = cache.get(1).getSome();
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.
> 70518.x6.nabble.com/Possible-starvation-in-striped-pool-
> message-tp15993p16081.html
> Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
