Hi Val, I'm sorry, of course only @QuerySqlField(index = true) makes an index on objects field. Fields without indexes make none additional overhead.
Group index on multiple fields is a one index (isn't it?) I don't understand what is still unclear. Entry footprint = key footprint + value footprint + entry overhead + index overhead. Index overhead depends on how many indices are enabled for the entry type. 2016-12-23 2:06 GMT+07:00 Valentin Kulichenko <valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com >: > Alexandr, > > See my comments below. > > On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 7:01 PM, Alexandr Kuramshin <ein.nsk...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Hi Val, > > > > the understanding is simple. > > > > When you enables the single index on entry class you get "First index > > overhead" per entry. > > > > When you enables two indices on entry class you get "First index > overhead" > > + "Next index overhead" per entry. > > > > With three indices you get "First index overhead" + 2 * "Next index > > overhead", and so on... > > > > This should be explained in more detail, probably with some trivial > example. Currently it's very unclear. > > > > > > Each annotated field with @QuerySqlField is an index, except multiple > > fields annotated with @QuerySqlField.Group. > > > > This actually confuses me a lot, because a field can be created with or > without index? Can you please clarify? How much overhead is introduced by a > field without index? With index? What about group indexes? > > > > > > Another way to defining indices is to use property "queryEntities" and > it's > > subproperty "indexes". See the article [1] > > > > [1] https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/indexes > > > > 2016-12-20 8:38 GMT+07:00 Valentin Kulichenko < > > valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com > > >: > > > > > Alexandr, > > > > > > Can you please clarify what is "First index overhead" and "Next index > > > overhead"? Generally, I think overhead provided by indexes should be > > > described in more details, now it's not very clear what happens when > > > indexes are added. > > > > > > Also the calculation example should be a separate section. > > > > > > -Val > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 1:07 AM, Alexandr Kuramshin < > > ein.nsk...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Thank you, Andrey, > > > > > > > > I'll do additional tests with expire policy and update the article. > > > > > > > > 2016-12-13 22:10 GMT+07:00 Andrey Mashenkov < > > andrey.mashen...@gmail.com > > > >: > > > > > > > > > Alexandr, > > > > > > > > > > In addition. If expire policy is configured, there is additional > > > overhead > > > > > to entries can be tracked by TtlManager. > > > > > This overhead is OnHeap and does not depend on cache MemoryMode > > (until > > > > > Ignite-3840 will be in master). > > > > > > > > > > For now overhead is about 32-40 bytes (EntryWrapper itself) + > (40-48) > > > > bytes > > > > > (ConcurrentSkipList node) per entry. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 10:37 AM, Alexandr Kuramshin < > > > > ein.nsk...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hello, Igniters, > > > > > > > > > > > > I'd like to represent updated article [1] about the subject. > > > > > > > > > > > > And I'll very appreciate your comments and questions about it. > > > > > > > > > > > > Please review. > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] http://apacheignite.gridgain.org/docs/capacity-planning > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Alexandr Kuramshin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > С уважением, > > > > > Машенков Андрей Владимирович > > > > > Тел. +7-921-932-61-82 > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > Andrey V. Mashenkov > > > > > Cerr: +7-921-932-61-82 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Thanks, > > > > Alexandr Kuramshin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Thanks, > > Alexandr Kuramshin > > > -- Thanks, Alexandr Kuramshin
