[infinispan-dev] Performance improvements, more...

[Bela Ban]

On 1/19/12 11:45 AM, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
> On 19 January 2012 09:59, Bela Ban<bban at redhat.com>  wrote:
>> It would be interesting to see the numbers with bbc128, which makes
>> sending a bit faster. I'd expect to see more writes and less reads,
>> compared to their relative numbers.
>
> Ok, done. This is the same Infinispan build, but using JGroups bbc128:
>
> Done 880,969,860 transactional operations in 24.71 minutes using 5.1.0-SNAPSHOT
>    875,033,689 reads and 5,936,171 writes
>    Reads / second: 590,216
>    Writes/ second: 4,003


OK, thanks. Not as dramatic though as the change in 23a031e...


> Looks like a bit slower - confirming the figures I had two days ago.
> Anyway my purpose with the comparison was just to proof the latest
> patches in Infinispan where going in the correct direction, so I'm
> intentionally not changing JGroups versions yet.
>
>> BTW: I'm done with my implementation of Table, and the numbers look
>> really impressive ! It is about the same as RingBuffer for smaller
>> insertions (5 million), but for 50 million the number stays about the
>> same (insertions and removals per second). For smaller numbers, Table is
>> ca 4 times *faster* than NakReceiverWindow.
>>
>> I still want to add more tests for Table (copy and convert the ones for
>> RingBuffer), and then switch NAKACK2 over from RingBuffer to Table. I'm
>> very curious to see the perf numbers after that change !
>>
>> Next comes passing up of entire bundles, this should also make a big
>> difference !
>> Exiting times, cheers !
>
> If you commit it on an experimental branch, I'll give it a preview run ..

The branch is JGRP-1396-2, the class is Table. There is a stress test 
called TableStressTest (you can compare it to 
NakReceiverWindowStressTest and RingBufferStressTest).


-- 
Bela Ban
Lead JGroups (http://www.jgroups.org)
JBoss / Red Hat