Re: [infinispan-dev] [Cloudtm-discussion] [SPAM] Re: Primary-Backup replication scheme in Infinispan

On 10 Mar 2011, at 18:41, Paolo Romano wrote: > On 3/10/11 11:44 AM, Manik Surtani wrote: >> On 9 Mar 2011, at 18:58, Paolo Romano wrote: >> >> <snip> >>> of course the primary (or master) can become a bottleneck if the number of update transactions is very large. If the % of write transactions is very high, however, then we have to distinguish two cases: low vs high contention. >>> >>> At high contention, in fact, the 2PC-based replication scheme used by Infinispan (2PC from now for the sake of brevity ;-) ) falls prey of deadlocks and starts trashing. This is the reasons why 2PC's performance is so poor in the plot attached to Diego and Sebastiano's mail for the case of 1000 keys. Using the primary-backup, being concurrency regulated locally at the primary, and much more efficiently, the actual performace is overall much better. >> This is even with deadlock detection enabled? > We have not experimented to enable deadlock detection yet. We'll do it > and let you know! Ok, it gets pretty heavily used in the community so there must be some good in it. :-) -- Manik Surtani manik(a)jboss.org twitter.com/maniksurtani Lead, Infinispan http://www.infinispan.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Colocation vs. Managed Hosting A question and answer guide to determining the best fit for your organization - today and in the future. http://p.sf.net/sfu/internap-sfd2d _______________________________________________ Cloudtm-discussion mailing list Cloudtm-discussion(a)lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cloudtm-discussion