next version (rewrite/fork): https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/sirona/trunk/core/src/main/java/org/apache/sirona/counters/OptimizedStatistics.java
was easier to centralize everything in a single class Romain Manni-Bucau Twitter: @rmannibucau Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/ LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau 2013/11/20 Phil Steitz <phil.ste...@gmail.com>: > On 11/20/13, 12:43 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: >> Hi >> >> A quick mail to give some feedbacks of my tests. >> >> I started to hack a bit to get rid of not used stats by sirona, >> typically I do ATM: >> >> setSumsqImpl(NoopStat.INSTANCE); >> setSumLogImpl(NoopStat.INSTANCE); >> setGeoMeanImpl(NoopStat.INSTANCE); >> >> (NoopStat is a mock of StorelessUnivariateStatistic doijg nothing) >> >> Another point which could be improoved is the duplication of info >> accross sub StorelessUnivariateStatistic (typically n computed several >> times for instance). > > Good point. Its kind of funny that simplest way to solve the > problem you mention at the end is to remove the flexibility that you > use in the beginning - i.e., to no longer use separate stats > instances to compute the bundled statistics. The setup is the way > it is precisely so that you can plug in alternative impls. I had > never thought of no-op-ing instances to suppress things, but it does > work. Having stats share state data is a little tricky but in > theory possible. The moment stats at least are set up to support > this. Patches are welcome. If you don't mind opening a JIRA to > suggest eliminating repeated computations that would be great. > > Phil >> Romain Manni-Bucau >> Twitter: @rmannibucau >> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/ >> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau >> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau >> >> >> >> 2013/11/6 Phil Steitz <phil.ste...@gmail.com>: >>> On 11/6/13 9:05 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: >>>> Great! >>>> >>>> Btw not sure for sirona we oculd use it. One constraint on sirona-core >>>> is to stay self contained. We already shade math3 so shading pool2 too >>>> would start to create a big jar for this need. I'll try to bench >>>> deeper next week too. >>> OK - and any ideas you have about how to implement something >>> lightweight inside [math] much appreciated. >>> >>> Phil >>>> Romain Manni-Bucau >>>> Twitter: @rmannibucau >>>> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/ >>>> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau >>>> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> 2013/11/6 Phil Steitz <phil.ste...@gmail.com>: >>>>> On 11/6/13 8:47 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: >>>>>> well pool are based on locks so I'm not sure (it would need deep >>>>>> benchs on a real app) it does worth it >>>>> Commons pool2 uses pretty lightweight locking and using a pool of >>>>> instances achieves the basic objective of reducing contention for >>>>> the single sync lock on one SummaryStatistics object. I bet it >>>>> would improve throughput over the single-instance approach if >>>>> maxActive, maxIdle were tuned. If I get some time to play with >>>>> this, I will report back with some benchmarks. >>>>> >>>>> Phil >>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau >>>>>> Twitter: @rmannibucau >>>>>> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/ >>>>>> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau >>>>>> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> 2013/11/6 Phil Steitz <phil.ste...@gmail.com>: >>>>>>> On 11/5/13 11:26 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: >>>>>>>> Hehe, right. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I looked a bit more today and LongAdder is only a part of the >>>>>>>> solution. The stat computation still needs to lock to get acces to >>>>>>>> previous values (N -> N+1). Basically the gain wouldn't be as >>>>>>>> important as I thought :(. >>>>>>> Right, but I think your original idea of maintaining a pool of >>>>>>> instances (fewer that one per thread) to be periodically aggregated >>>>>>> is a good one. See below. >>>>>>>> As I said before we'll wait a bit to gather feedbacks, if it blocks >>>>>>>> I'll come back trying to find + propose a solution. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks in all cases for your answers! >>>>>>> A workaround that I have started playing with (partly for other >>>>>>> benchmarking reasons) might be to actually use a pool for the stats >>>>>>> objects that the monitoring threads use. Using a pool would allow >>>>>>> you to monitor and tune the parameters. We now have (well, once the >>>>>>> VOTE in progress completes :) a decently performing pool >>>>>>> implementation. The tricky bit is locking the instances during >>>>>>> aggregation. One way to handle this would be to have the factory's >>>>>>> passivate method and the aggregation thread contend for locks on the >>>>>>> pooled stats instances. The only contention would be when >>>>>>> aggregation is copying individual instances and contention would be >>>>>>> with at most one client thread (waiting to proceed in passivate). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Phil >>>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau >>>>>>>> Twitter: @rmannibucau >>>>>>>> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/ >>>>>>>> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau >>>>>>>> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 2013/11/5 Phil Steitz <phil.ste...@gmail.com>: >>>>>>>>> On 11/5/13 9:57 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: >>>>>>>>>> @Phil: hmm can be but the framework would create its own overhead >>>>>>>>>> which >>>>>>>>>> would be avoided with a dedicated solution, no? Well thought gain >>>>>>>>>> was great >>>>>>>>>> for small investment but ok to postpone it >>>>>>>>> As I said, patches welcome. Go for it. My point about the >>>>>>>>> framework was that when you actually get this implemented inside, >>>>>>>>> e.g. SummaryStatistics, you will have built a mini-framework. >>>>>>>>> Whatever overhead it has, it will have ;) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Phil >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Le 5 nov. 2013 18:54, "Romain Manni-Bucau" <rmannibu...@gmail.com> a >>>>>>>>>> écrit : >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Well I didnt test sirona in prod but when using jamon (same kind of >>>>>>>>>>> framework) locks were creating a serious overhead on some benches. >>>>>>>>>>> Not the >>>>>>>>>>> most important but enough to try to solve it. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> That said we are not yet in 1.0 so Im ok to wait for more serious >>>>>>>>>>> feedbacks if you think it is better >>>>>>>>>>> Le 5 nov. 2013 18:48, "Ted Dunning" <ted.dunn...@gmail.com> a écrit >>>>>>>>>>> : >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 10:09 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau >>>>>>>>>>>> <rmannibu...@gmail.com>wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Oh sorry, that's what I said early, in a real app no or not >>>>>>>>>>>>> enough to >>>>>>>>>>>> be an >>>>>>>>>>>>> issue buy on simple apps or very high thrououtput apps yes. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Le 5 nov. 2013 07:00, "Ted Dunning" <ted.dunn...@gmail.com> a >>>>>>>>>>>>> écrit : >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> That isn't what I meant. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do you really think that more than one metric has to update >>>>>>>>>>>> (increment, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> say) at precisely the same time? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I realize that is what you said. Do you have any serious examples >>>>>>>>>>>> where >>>>>>>>>>>> metrics have to be updated all or nothing? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >>>>>>> >>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >>>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >>>> >>>> >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >>> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >> >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
