What was your change ? Pull request ? :) On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 5:35 AM nigro_franz <[email protected]> wrote:
> The GC free paging (on the write path at least) seems to perform pretty > good: > > This is without using it: > > Producer Throughput: 42153 ops/sec > Consumer Throughput: 42453 ops/sec > EndToEnd Throughput: 40818 ops/sec > EndToEnd SERVICE-TIME Latencies distribution in MICROSECONDS > mean 852567.48 > min 517996.54 > 50.00% 843055.10 > 90.00% 1098907.65 > 99.00% 1384120.32 > 99.90% 1451229.18 > 99.99% 1493172.22 > max 1493172.22 > count 1000000 > > This is using it: > > Producer Throughput: 49744 ops/sec > Consumer Throughput: 49739 ops/sec > EndToEnd Throughput: 49738 ops/sec > EndToEnd SERVICE-TIME Latencies distribution in MICROSECONDS > mean 4948.23 > min 92.16 > 50.00% 2162.69 > 90.00% 11337.73 > 99.00% 42991.62 > 99.90% 115867.65 > 99.99% 121110.53 > max 122159.10 > count 1000000 > > The throughput is increased by 25% and the latencies are far better (less > GC > and shorter ones). > > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Paging-tp4724085p4724761.html > Sent from the ActiveMQ - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > -- Clebert Suconic
