Re: [infinispan-dev] DataContainer performance review

Hey, good news! I have found that a main culprit of a poor DataContainer performance for large caches (100K entries +) is in fact use of default concurrency of 32. If users are going to use caches with many entries then they should also increase concurrency level. I found that concurrency of 512 works fairly well for caches up to million entries. Also note that if users are using such large caches (1M+ entries) I do not see the point of having eviction, they should just use unbounded DataContainer. I am also looking to chart these for easy review, forum post, and DataContainer performance tuning wiki. Tomorrow I'll determine impact of passivation on DataContainer performance. Cheers, Vladimir On 11-06-28 10:20 AM, Vladimir Blagojevic wrote: > On 11-06-28 10:06 AM, Galder Zamarreño wrote: >> Vladimir, >> >> I think it's better if you run your tests in one of the cluster or perf machines cos that way everyone has access to the same base system and results can be compared, particularly when changes are made. Also, you avoid local apps or CPU usage affecting your test results. >> >> I agree with Sanne, put ops for LIRS don't look go in comparison with LRU. Did you run some profiling? >> > Hey, > > Very likely you are right and it is a better approach but it does not > take much to notice a trend of deteriorating BCHM performance for large > map/cache size. Looking to do some profiling now. > > Cheers > > > _______________________________________________ > infinispan-dev mailing list > infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev _______________________________________________ infinispan-dev mailing list infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev