[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-2911?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Knut Anders Hatlen resolved DERBY-2911.
---------------------------------------

       Resolution: Fixed
    Fix Version/s: 10.4.0.0

Merged the latest changes (rev. 635556, 635577, 636247, 636670, 642752, 642755) 
to 10.4 and committed revision 643327.

Marking the issue as resolved (with fix version 10.4.0.0 since almost all the 
code went in before the 10.4 branch was cut).

> Implement a buffer manager using java.util.concurrent classes
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: DERBY-2911
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-2911
>             Project: Derby
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Performance, Services
>    Affects Versions: 10.4.0.0
>            Reporter: Knut Anders Hatlen
>            Assignee: Knut Anders Hatlen
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: 10.4.0.0
>
>         Attachments: cleaner.diff, cleaner.tar, d2911-1.diff, d2911-1.stat, 
> d2911-10.diff, d2911-10.stat, d2911-11.diff, d2911-12.diff, d2911-13.diff, 
> d2911-14.diff, d2911-15.diff, d2911-2.diff, d2911-3.diff, d2911-4.diff, 
> d2911-5.diff, d2911-6.diff, d2911-6.stat, d2911-7.diff, d2911-7a.diff, 
> d2911-9.diff, d2911-9.stat, d2911-enable.diff, d2911-entry-javadoc.diff, 
> d2911-unused.diff, d2911-unused.stat, d2911perf.java, derby-2911-8.diff, 
> derby-2911-8.stat, perftest.diff, perftest.pdf, perftest.stat, 
> perftest2.diff, perftest6.pdf, poisson_patch8.tar
>
>
> There are indications that the buffer manager is a bottleneck for some types 
> of multi-user load. For instance, Anders Morken wrote this in a comment on 
> DERBY-1704: "With a separate table and index for each thread (to remove latch 
> contention and lock waits from the equation) we (...) found that 
> org.apache.derby.impl.services.cache.Clock.find()/release() caused about 5 
> times more contention than the synchronization in LockSet.lockObject() and 
> LockSet.unlock(). That might be an indicator of where to apply the next push".
> It would be interesting to see the scalability and performance of a buffer 
> manager which exploits the concurrency utilities added in Java SE 5.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

Reply via email to