[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AVRO-2247?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16999354#comment-16999354
]
Martin Jubelgas commented on AVRO-2247:
---------------------------------------
It's been quite a while, so I'd like to once more ask for feedback on
https://github.com/apache/avro/pull/391
The proposed change improves reading performance in existing benchmark tests by
up to 60% (more realistically maybe 30%), without breaking compatibility so I
personally think it would be a shame to let the chance of such a performance
increase go to waste.
So... could anyone please let me know what needs to be adressed in order to get
this merged, or just tell me to drop the issue.
> Improve Java reading performance with a new reader
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: AVRO-2247
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AVRO-2247
> Project: Apache Avro
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: java
> Reporter: Martin Jubelgas
> Priority: Major
> Fix For: 1.10.0
>
> Attachments: Perf-Comparison.md
>
>
> Complementary to AVRO-2090, I have been working on decoding of Avro objects
> in Java and am suggesting a new implementation of a DatumReader that improves
> read performance for both generic and specific records by approximately 20%
> (and even more in cases of nested objects with defaults, a case I encounter a
> lot in practical use).
> Key concept is to create a detailed execution plan once at DatumReader. This
> execution plan contains all required defaulting/lookup values so they need
> not be looked up during object traversal while reading.
> The reader implementation can be enabled and disabled per GenericData
> instance. The system default is set via the system variable
> "org.apache.avro.fastread" (defaults to "false").
> Attached a performance comparison of the existing implementation with the
> proposed one. Will open a pull request with respective code in a bit (not
> including interoperability with the optimizations of AVRO-2090 yet). Please
> let me know your opinion of whether this is worth pursuing further.
>
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
