[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-12312?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16464394#comment-16464394
]
David Smiley commented on SOLR-12312:
-------------------------------------
While I look at this a bit more in my IDE, I wonder if we even need this buf at
all. Notice that {{fetchPackets}} accepts {{FastInputStream fis}} and that's
what we read from. FIS contains an accessible {{byte[]}} internally; it's
partially why FIS exists in the first place (vs some generic InputStream).
fetchPackets could be recoded to have a loop within the packet reading to use
FIS's buffer directly. That would not be an abuse; we're just sending data
along to other places (to a file and some checksum calculator thingy). The net
effect is one less buffer to allocate and copy data to.
That said, I so easily become guilty of scope creep and this is extra work with
more intricacies than the fairly simple change we have on sizing the buf
correctly.
> Replication's IndexFetcher buf size can be initialized smarter to not waste
> RAM/GC
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-12312
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-12312
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Security Level: Public(Default Security Level. Issues are Public)
> Components: replication (java)
> Reporter: David Smiley
> Assignee: David Smiley
> Priority: Minor
> Time Spent: 40m
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> IndexFetcher's constructor knows the size of the file it's going to transfer.
> As-such, it ought to initialize the "buf" field to no larger than this size.
> This has been shown to waste Java heap/GC in an environment with lots of
> cores of small indexes and thus small files.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
