TBufferedTransport seems to be missing from the Java library bundled with
cassandra-bin (0.6.1)...

On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 5:54 PM, Miguel Verde <miguelitov...@gmail.com>wrote:

> Yes, one should use either the TBufferedTransport or TFramedTransport in
> Java for performance reasons. These are analogous to the C# Socket classes
> and you should see a performance improvement from buffering.
>
>
>
> On Apr 24, 2010, at 5:31 PM, Joost Ouwerkerk <jo...@openplaces.org> wrote:
>
> Is this something that also needs to be managed in Java? In most examples
> I've seen, connections are created like this:
>
>             TSocket socket = new TSocket(location, thriftport)
>             TBinaryProtocol binaryProtocol = new TBinaryProtocol(socket, 
> false, false);
>
>             Cassandra.Client client = new Cassandra.Client(binaryProtocol);
>
> Is that sub-optimal?
> joost.
>
> On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 3:29 PM, Heath Oderman < <he...@526valley.com>
> he...@526valley.com> wrote:
>
>> Really interesting find.
>>
>> After Jonathan E. suggested py_stress and it seemed clear the problem was
>> in my .net client I spent a few days debugging the client in detail.
>>
>> I ended up changing my CassandraContext instantiation to use a
>>
>>           TBuffferedProtocol(TSocket) instead of a
>>           TSocket directly.
>>
>> The difference was *dramatic*.
>>
>> The calls to debian suddenly behaved as expected, eclipsing the write
>> speeds under load of the calls to the OSX box by a factor of 2!
>>
>> The change caused a performance increase in the client communicating with
>> OSX as well, but the improvement was smaller.
>>
>> I don't understand exactly, but clearly there's a difference in the way
>> that Debian and OSX handle socket level communications that has a big effect
>> on a .net client calling in from windows.
>>
>> It's been a really interesting experiment and I throughly appreciate all
>> the help and pointers I've gotten from this list.
>>
>> Cassandra is so fast, and so impressive it strains credibility.  I'm
>> totally amazed by what these guys have put together.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Stu
>>
>
>

Reply via email to