[keycloak-dev] infinispan as a storage mechanism

Tue Feb 27 13:11:18 EST 2018

On 27 February 2018 at 15:02, Bill Burke <bburke at redhat.com> wrote:

> This is something I've been doing off and on for awhile.  An hour here
> or there.  Its a lot of monotonous work.
>
> Well worth it IMO if our build times drop drastically.  30 min build
> is becoming burdensome.  If the console tests get turned on combined
> with all the other tests that are added daily, I can see this turning
> into 60 min by the end of the year.  Not to mention when I run a
> single test from the IDE it takes like 10 seconds to start.  I'm just
> sick and tired of it.
>

I can only see how it saves time on starting the Keycloak server, not for
individual tests. That means you're only saving a few seconds each time the
server is started, which is not many times for a full run. You'll probably
end up shaving 1 min of the whole 30 min at best.

Andy also mentioned that the Hibernate guys are working on performance.
There is something weird about the Hibernate startup time in general. So if
there's improvements there that 1 min you could shave would become even
less.

We're also working towards having the full testsuite ran on PRs, which
means as a dev you would be better of picking and running only the tests
you believe may be affected and let the CI run the complete set of jobs.

I'd never bother running the admin console tests locally unless I've done
some changes to the admin console. I also found that running the tests from
the IDE run significantly quicker than through Maven. The difference there
is down to something else than JPA as that's used in both cases. Personally
I very rarely build the full distro or run the tests from Maven at all. I
just let Travis do that, while I run tests through the IDE.

>
> For migration, if you base your stored objects on Maps, you only have
> to worry about cases where you're modifying objects that are
> serialized.  These would need to be versioned as per java
> serialization.  New things
>

I really don't want us to maintain two different persistence layers. It's a
lot of duplicated effort. Becomes even worse when you start thinking about
things like migration, cross-dc, rolling upgrades, etc..

If you are suggesting to completely drop our JPA store altogether and use
Infinispan with a cache store instead that could be an interesting option,
but I have loads and loads of concerns around that.

>
>
> On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 1:53 AM, Stian Thorgersen <sthorger at redhat.com>
> wrote:
> > I'm really not convinced about this. Infinispan still needs to persist
> the
> > data. It still needs to handle migration whenever we change things. It's
> > another layer to get working correctly, etc.. I think we have more
> important
> > work than to work on another data layer.
> >
> > On 26 February 2018 at 21:47, Bill Burke <bburke at redhat.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> I'm thinking of this mostly for running our testsuite.  If you're not
> >> developing on DB, much nicer if your test startup times is
> >> milliseconds rather than 5-10 secs.
> >>
> >> For production, I'm thinking more of when people need lightweight
> >> keycloak instances and are doing a lot of identity federation.  This
> >> is really long term thoughts though.
> >>
> >> On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 2:56 PM, Pedro Igor Silva <psilva at redhat.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > I think MongoDB will start supporting transactions very soon on v4
> ....
> >> >
> >> > I'm not sure about running both app and database in the same VM
> though.
> >> > For
> >> > dev purposes that is fine, but in real world scenarios you probably
> want
> >> > to
> >> > avoid sharing resources (mem, cpu) with your DB. In your case, people
> >> > will
> >> > probably need JBoss DataGrid in production.
> >> >
> >> > On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 4:30 PM, Bill Burke <bburke at redhat.com>
> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Other than MongoDB not supporting transactions or even sessions?  And
> >> >> requiring a DB to be run in a separate VM?
> >> >>
> >> >> No not really :)
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 12:54 PM, Pedro Igor Silva <
> psilva at redhat.com>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> > Isn't this somewhat related with what we used to have with MongoDB
> ?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 2:35 PM, Bill Burke <bburke at redhat.com>
> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> If we had a built-in, clusterable storage mechanism for Keycloak
> >> >> >> using
> >> >> >> Infinispan we would:
> >> >> >> * Shorten build times drastically.  30 minutes and growing for me
> >> >> >> for
> >> >> >> JPA builds.  Liquibase + JPA startup takes 5-7 seconds on my box.
> >> >> >> * Simpler startup.  No need to start a DB.
> >> >> >> * Reduce memory footprint?  I think JPA is responsible for a lot
> of
> >> >> >> classes loaded.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> I've started some work on this in spare time.  I'd say I'd be done
> >> >> >> in
> >> >> >> like 2 months considering the other work I have in queue.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Looking at FineGrainAtomicMap as an implementation.  Should make
> DB
> >> >> >> migration simple and replication quicker.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> --
> >> >> >> Bill Burke
> >> >> >> Red Hat
> >> >> >> _______________________________________________
> >> >> >> keycloak-dev mailing list
> >> >> >> keycloak-dev at lists.jboss.org
> >> >> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> Bill Burke
> >> >> Red Hat
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Bill Burke
> >> Red Hat
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> keycloak-dev mailing list
> >> keycloak-dev at lists.jboss.org
> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Bill Burke
> Red Hat
>