]
Galder Zamarreño commented on ISPN-2340:
----------------------------------------
Hmm, this might be leftover from a previous attempt to solve the issue. Removing the
load() call causes no issues.
AsyncStore.remove() load the bucket from store inducing performance
problem
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Key: ISPN-2340
URL:
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-2340
Project: Infinispan
Issue Type: Bug
Components: Loaders and Stores
Affects Versions: 5.2.0.Alpha4
Reporter: Christophe Domas
Assignee: Galder Zamarreño
Fix For: 5.2.0.CR1
I'm currently using infinispan-5.1.5 as a local persistent cache (like a persistent
map) with no eviction and write-behind for maximum performance.
I tried the 5.2.0alpha4 version and item processing mean decreased from 4ms to 60 ms.
So I profiled the application and discovered that the Async.remove(Object) implementation
differs from 5.2 to 5.1:
+5.1+:
{code}
@Override
public boolean remove(Object key) {
enqueue(new Remove(key));
return true;
}
{code}
+5.2+:
{code}
@Override
public boolean remove(Object key) {
try {
InternalCacheEntry load = load(key);
if (load != null) {
enqueue(new Remove(key));
return true;
}
return false;
} catch (CacheLoaderException e) {
throw new CacheException("Could not load key/value entries from
cacheloader", e);
}
}
{code}
So each time I remove an entry from my cache, I pay the cost of a bucket load from the
store:
{code}
Thread [pool-9-thread-1] (Suspended)
ExtendedRiverUnmarshaller(RiverUnmarshaller).doReadObject(boolean) line: 209
ExtendedRiverUnmarshaller(AbstractObjectInput).readObject() line: 37
JBossMarshaller(AbstractJBossMarshaller).objectFromObjectStream(ObjectInput) line: 163
VersionAwareMarshaller.objectFromObjectStream(ObjectInput) line: 190
CacheMarshaller(AbstractDelegatingMarshaller).objectFromObjectStream(ObjectInput) line:
79
FileCacheStore.objectFromInputStreamInReentrantMode(InputStream) line: 433
FileCacheStore.loadBucket(File) line: 306
FileCacheStore.loadBucket(Integer) line: 280
FileCacheStore(BucketBasedCacheStore).loadLockSafe(Object, Integer) line: 60
FileCacheStore(BucketBasedCacheStore).loadLockSafe(Object, Object) line: 49
FileCacheStore(LockSupportCacheStore<L>).load(Object) line: 142
AsyncStore(AbstractDelegatingStore).load(Object) line: 120
AsyncStore.remove(Object) line: 163
CacheStoreInterceptor.visitRemoveCommand(InvocationContext, RemoveCommand) line: 221
RemoveCommand.acceptVisitor(InvocationContext, Visitor) line: 72
CacheLoaderInterceptor(CommandInterceptor).invokeNextInterceptor(InvocationContext,
VisitableCommand) line: 118
CacheLoaderInterceptor.visitRemoveCommand(InvocationContext, RemoveCommand) line: 138
RemoveCommand.acceptVisitor(InvocationContext, Visitor) line: 72
EntryWrappingInterceptor(CommandInterceptor).invokeNextInterceptor(InvocationContext,
VisitableCommand) line: 118
EntryWrappingInterceptor.invokeNextAndApplyChanges(InvocationContext,
FlagAffectedCommand) line: 211
EntryWrappingInterceptor.visitRemoveCommand(InvocationContext, RemoveCommand) line:
161
RemoveCommand.acceptVisitor(InvocationContext, Visitor) line: 72
NonTransactionalLockingInterceptor(CommandInterceptor).invokeNextInterceptor(InvocationContext,
VisitableCommand) line: 118
NonTransactionalLockingInterceptor.visitRemoveCommand(InvocationContext, RemoveCommand)
line: 104
RemoveCommand.acceptVisitor(InvocationContext, Visitor) line: 72
NotificationInterceptor(CommandInterceptor).invokeNextInterceptor(InvocationContext,
VisitableCommand) line: 118
NotificationInterceptor(CommandInterceptor).handleDefault(InvocationContext,
VisitableCommand) line: 132
NotificationInterceptor(AbstractVisitor).visitRemoveCommand(InvocationContext,
RemoveCommand) line: 68
RemoveCommand.acceptVisitor(InvocationContext, Visitor) line: 72
IsMarshallableInterceptor(CommandInterceptor).invokeNextInterceptor(InvocationContext,
VisitableCommand) line: 118
IsMarshallableInterceptor(CommandInterceptor).handleDefault(InvocationContext,
VisitableCommand) line: 132
IsMarshallableInterceptor(AbstractVisitor).visitRemoveCommand(InvocationContext,
RemoveCommand) line: 68
IsMarshallableInterceptor.visitRemoveCommand(InvocationContext, RemoveCommand) line:
125
RemoveCommand.acceptVisitor(InvocationContext, Visitor) line: 72
InvocationContextInterceptor(CommandInterceptor).invokeNextInterceptor(InvocationContext,
VisitableCommand) line: 118
InvocationContextInterceptor.handleAll(InvocationContext, VisitableCommand) line: 129
InvocationContextInterceptor.handleDefault(InvocationContext, VisitableCommand) line:
93
InvocationContextInterceptor(AbstractVisitor).visitRemoveCommand(InvocationContext,
RemoveCommand) line: 68
RemoveCommand.acceptVisitor(InvocationContext, Visitor) line: 72
InterceptorChain.invoke(InvocationContext, VisitableCommand) line: 347
CacheImpl<K,V>.executeCommandAndCommitIfNeeded(InvocationContext,
VisitableCommand) line: 999
CacheImpl<K,V>.remove(Object, EnumSet<Flag>, ClassLoader) line: 290
DecoratedCache<K,V>.remove(Object) line: 324
CacheBidiMap<K,V>(AbstractDualBidiMap<K,V>).remove(Object) line: 199
OrderCache.removePendingByClientId(String) line: 168
OrderEventCacheManager(EventCacheManager).receiveAck(OrderId) line: 166
OrderEventCacheManager(EventCacheManager).cacheEventNotification(IamapiEvent, OrderId)
line: 101
OrderMarketFixService.onOrderEvent(OrderEvent) line: 88
OrderEventDispatcher.fireEvent(OrderEvent) line: 52
OrderEventDispatcher.run() line: 67
ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker) line: 1110
ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run() line: 603
Thread.run() line: 722
{code}
My config file is:
{code}
<default>
<loaders passivation="false" preload="true"
shared="false">
<loader class="org.infinispan.loaders.file.FileCacheStore">
<properties>
<property name="location" value="cache" />
<property name="fsyncMode" value="perWrite" />
</properties>
<async enabled="true" />
</loader>
</loaders>
<expiration reaperEnabled="false" />
</default>
{code}
(I use perWrite for fsyncMode because we reached linux open files ulimit maximum)
We cannot consider that as a bug, but this performance problem is a show-stopper for us
to upgrade to 5.2.
Best regards,
Christophe
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: