Thank you Nick for your tests. BTW which db did you use to get these
results? PGSQL?
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 10:10 PM, Nick Scavelli <nscavell(a)redhat.com
<mailto:nscavell@redhat.com>> wrote:
Ran some more tests as I saw 1.15 having better numbers for pages
less then 500.
Looks like the new jar is scaling better, and even outperforming
1.14 except for 500 pages. Here are the results
http://bit.ly/T2ghPK. The second tab shows the results for
batching commits rather then waiting and committing 500 pages at
once. 1.15 outperforms 1.14 in this scenario as well.
On 10/30/2012 03:56 AM, Nicolas Filotto wrote:
> Do you have new results to provide? Especially on PGSQL?
>
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 9:26 PM, Nick Scavelli
> <nscavell(a)redhat.com <mailto:nscavell@redhat.com>> wrote:
>
> Some quick tests suggest there seems to be some improvement
> however the difference between 1.14 and 1.15 is still there.
> And it still seems to be the time that is spent in lucene
> updating the index (IndexWriter#addDocument). With the new
> jar it seems to indicate a little less time is being spent
> here, but no where close to the time spent in JCR1.14.
>
>
> On 10/26/2012 11:31 AM, Nicolas Filotto wrote:
>> My mistake jcr.core is not enough you need core.database
>> too, you can get the latest versions from here
>>
http://repository.exoplatform.org/content/groups/public/org/exoplatform/j...
>> and here
>>
http://repository.exoplatform.org/content/groups/public/org/exoplatform/c...
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 7:37 AM, Michal Vanco
>> <mvanco(a)redhat.com <mailto:mvanco@redhat.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Same for me with mysql when I was about to try
>> initialization of manyPages in portal with upgraded jcr
>> core. Log is here:
>>
http://pastebin.com/yqTXEbs5
>>
>> Michal
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> > From: "Matt Wringe" <mwringe(a)redhat.com
>> <mailto:mwringe@redhat.com>>
>> > To: "Nick Scavelli" <nscavell(a)redhat.com
>> <mailto:nscavell@redhat.com>>
>> > Cc: "gatein-dev" <gatein-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>> <mailto:gatein-dev@lists.jboss.org>>
>> > Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 10:12:20 PM
>> > Subject: Re: [gatein-dev] Performance degradation
>> between JCR 1.14 and 1.15?
>> >
>> > same with mysql
>> >
>> > On Thu 25 Oct 2012 04:05:52 PM EDT, Nick Scavelli wrote:
>> > > Using both v1 and v2 I get errors in postgres. Full
>> stacktrace here
>> > >
http://pastebin.com/BFAMW85M
>> > >
>> > > On 10/25/2012 08:43 AM, Nicolas Filotto wrote:
>> > >> Here is the latest version
>> > >>
>>
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/20836627/exo.jcr.component.core-1.15.0-CR2-SNAPSH...
>> > >>
>> > >> On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 9:57 PM, Matt Wringe
>> <mwringe(a)redhat.com <mailto:mwringe@redhat.com>
>> > >> <mailto:mwringe@redhat.com
>> <mailto:mwringe@redhat.com>>> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> On 24/10/12 03:33 PM, Nicolas Filotto wrote:
>> > >>> Could you please retry with this jar?
>> > >>
>> > >> I tested it quickly with the updated jar, and
>> it seems to be
>> > >> much
>> > >> closer to the 1.14 results in my test when
>> dealing with 500
>> > >> pages. I will let Nick comment if it fixes the
>> issues he was
>> > >> seeing with import/export of sites.
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>>
>> > >>> On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 2:51 PM, Nick Scavelli
>> > >>> <nscavell(a)redhat.com
>> <mailto:nscavell@redhat.com> <mailto:nscavell@redhat.com
>> <mailto:nscavell@redhat.com>>> wrote:
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Here are results of some quick tests I ran
>> on Friday
>> > >>> using
>> > >>> PostgreSQL. Note this is total time spent saving
>> session
>> > >>> after 500 pages, not time spent indexing.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> 1.15: 112.916s, 113.433s, 110.835s
>> > >>>
>> > >>> 1.14: 69.711s, 81.118s, 81.680s
>> > >>>
>> > >>> For 400 pages (only ran this test once)
>> > >>> 1.15: 61.503s
>> > >>> 1.14: 57.856s
>> > >>>
>> > >>> And the less pages the more closely 1.15
>> seems to perform
>> > >>> close to 1.14. This is a very low sample
>> size, and my
>> > >>> tests
>> > >>> might not best paint an accurate picture,
>> but it does
>> > >>> seem
>> > >>> that 1.14 consistently out performs 1.15.
>> So take it as
>> > >>> you
>> > >>> will. I'm also curious what performance
is
>> like if I
>> > >>> would
>> > >>> save the session after every page, instead
>> of one large
>> > >>> commit of 500 pages.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> - Nick
>> > >>>
>> > >>
>> > >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > gatein-dev mailing list
>> > gatein-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>> <mailto:gatein-dev@lists.jboss.org>
>> >
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/gatein-dev
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> gatein-dev mailing list
>> gatein-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>> <mailto:gatein-dev@lists.jboss.org>
>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/gatein-dev
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> gatein-dev mailing list
>> gatein-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:gatein-dev@lists.jboss.org>
>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/gatein-dev
>
>