[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-4718?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13997406#comment-13997406
 ] 

Benedict commented on CASSANDRA-4718:
-------------------------------------

 bq. Benedict WRT to the 2.1-batchnetty comparison, what did the latencies look 
like?

Ryan's graphs are a much better way to view latencies; on the whole they seem 
universally as good or better (generally much better)

bq. The more latency is introduced to the tasks the less effect would spinning 
have or in other words there is need to spin is eliminated

Yes, also even more important is that the unpark() cost, when amortized over a 
long running operation, becomes insignificant regardless of if it is incurred; 
and producers cannot make forward progress anyway because the native-transport 
queue is full so avoiding paying the unpark cost on the network thread really 
doesn't achieve us anything, as those threads cannot make any forward progress. 
I fully expect there to be very little effect on workloads as the dataset 
exceeds memory and the row size climbs.

> More-efficient ExecutorService for improved throughput
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CASSANDRA-4718
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-4718
>             Project: Cassandra
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>            Reporter: Jonathan Ellis
>            Assignee: Benedict
>            Priority: Minor
>              Labels: performance
>             Fix For: 2.1.0
>
>         Attachments: 4718-v1.patch, PerThreadQueue.java, aws.svg, 
> aws_read.svg, backpressure-stress.out.txt, baq vs trunk.png, 
> belliotsmith_branches-stress.out.txt, jason_read.svg, jason_read_latency.svg, 
> jason_write.svg, op costs of various queues.ods, stress op rate with various 
> queues.ods, v1-stress.out
>
>
> Currently all our execution stages dequeue tasks one at a time.  This can 
> result in contention between producers and consumers (although we do our best 
> to minimize this by using LinkedBlockingQueue).
> One approach to mitigating this would be to make consumer threads do more 
> work in "bulk" instead of just one task per dequeue.  (Producer threads tend 
> to be single-task oriented by nature, so I don't see an equivalent 
> opportunity there.)
> BlockingQueue has a drainTo(collection, int) method that would be perfect for 
> this.  However, no ExecutorService in the jdk supports using drainTo, nor 
> could I google one.
> What I would like to do here is create just such a beast and wire it into (at 
> least) the write and read stages.  (Other possible candidates for such an 
> optimization, such as the CommitLog and OutboundTCPConnection, are not 
> ExecutorService-based and will need to be one-offs.)
> AbstractExecutorService may be useful.  The implementations of 
> ICommitLogExecutorService may also be useful. (Despite the name these are not 
> actual ExecutorServices, although they share the most important properties of 
> one.)



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)

Reply via email to