Igniters, IGNITE-950 branch with the latest API changes was merged to the ignite-1282 branch. There is still a couple of pending changes related to configuration (these changes must be made after the merge) and performance, but I think now it is a good moment for the community to review and leave feedback to the proposed changes.
Looking forward for the comments :) 2015-11-05 16:11 GMT+03:00 Alexey Goncharuk <alexey.goncha...@gmail.com>: > I think it's a critical issue; good thing is that the ticket already > contains a proper description, so at least it is clear what to fix. I'll > try to take a look at this over the weekend. > > 2015-11-05 15:45 GMT+03:00 Vladimir Ozerov <voze...@gridgain.com>: > >> Igniters, >> >> One more thing - I found a ticket *IGNITE-1377 *where portable metadata >> update could cause hangs in cache. As we are planning to have >> PortableMarshaller as default one, looks like this ticket is better to be >> fixed before the release. >> >> On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 3:30 PM, Vladimir Ozerov <voze...@gridgain.com> >> wrote: >> >> > When I look into profiler, I see that actual work with portables takes >> > only relatively small fraction of time. The only significant hotspot I >> saw >> > was query parsing, but we already discussed this in another topic and >> Sergi >> > created a ticket. >> > >> > To improve performance even further, we need to start working on >> > microoptimizations, because I see that query execution produces loooots >> of >> > garbage due to dozens of wrappers, primitives boxing, etc.. Something >> comes >> > form portables, something comes from indexing. I do not think that >> working >> > solely on portables can give us a breakthrough in performance. >> > >> > On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 12:50 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan < >> dsetrak...@apache.org> >> > wrote: >> > >> >> On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 10:25 AM, Vladimir Ozerov <voze...@gridgain.com >> > >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> > >> >> > Also I measured query performance on some local benchmarks and got >> >> > acceptable resutls - queries are about 5-7% slower with poratbles >> than >> >> with >> >> > OptimizedMarshaller. Looks very promising to me provided that we work >> >> with >> >> > deserialized objects now. >> >> >> >> >> >> Vladimir, I don’t think we can treat these results as acceptable. So >> far, >> >> Ignite has been doing very well on all competitive benchmarks, and we >> >> cannot afford to start loosing any of them. >> >> >> >> Now, I remember seeing emails about many more performance >> optimizations we >> >> can add, like aligning String representation with binary >> representation, >> >> etc. Do you think after adding all the optimizations we will still be >> >> slower or faster? >> >> >> >> D. >> >> >> > >> > >> > >
