Re: [infinispan-dev] still to do on HR-embedded integration in ISPN-2281

Hi, so I gave it another try with latest Infinispan and Infinispan-server snapshots (HEAD: a901168, resp. bc432fa) . In short, the results are still the same for inVM mode but worse for client-server mode. Of course, I haven't changed anything in the test since last time. This time, I left out the results for 1MB entries because there's high distortion due to the low number of entries stored in a cache (storing 100MB of data). Previously, the results looked better for HotRod compared to the first round of tests I did for ISPN 5.2. Now the results for HotRod are worst of the three measurements, inVM mode remains the same: HotRod (ISPN 5.2): entry size -> overhead per entry 512B -> 174B 1kB -> 178B 10kB -> 176B HotRod (ISPN 5.3-SNAPSHOT, a few weeks ago) 512B -> 159 (~ -9%) 1kB -> 159 (~ -11%) 10kB -> 154 (this is perhaps affected by the low number of entries stored in mem.) HotRod (ISPN 5.3-SNAPSHOT, now) 512B -> 191 1kB -> 191 (measured twice) 10kB -> 186 (looks a bit distorted already) ------------------------ Memcached (ISPN 5.2) 512B -> 184 1kB -> 181 10kB -> 182 Memcached (ISPN 5.3-SNAPSHOT) 512 -> 228 1kB -> 227 10kB -> 235 -------------------------------- REST (ISPN 5.2) 512B -> 208 1kB -> 205 10kB -> 206 REST (ISPN 5.3-SNAPSHOT) 512 -> 247 1kB -> 247 10kB -> 251 ------------------------------------ inVM (ISPN 5.2) 512B -> 151 1kB -> 151 10kB -> 155 inVM (ISPN 5.3-SNAPSHOT) 512 -> 150 1kB -> 150 10kB -> 150 Martin Dne 23.5.2013 18:13, Mircea Markus napsal(a): > Hi Martin, > > Galder has finalised the remaining bits of ISPN-2281. Is it possible for you to re-run the test to see where we are with the memory consumption? > > On 13 May 2013, at 10:44, Galder Zamarreño<galder(a)redhat.com> wrote: > >>> On May 7, 2013, at 4:55 PM, Manik Surtani<msurtani(a)redhat.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On 7 May 2013, at 15:39, Martin Gencur<mgencur(a)redhat.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I can make a blog post once we have this for Memcached and REST. I guess it is not ready yet. >>>> Yes please. Nice work. :) > Cheers,