Artem, in ignite 2.9 a way to build C++ for linux/mac os x was changed (autotools to cmake). As an author of this change, I want to contribute in documentation. As far as I understand, now it should be done through PR to specific repository. Could you please help me with this?
пт, 28 авг. 2020 г. в 16:33, Anton Kalashnikov <kaa....@yandex.ru>: > Hi Guys, > > As I understand we will be merging some tickets to release. May I suggest > also add ticket [1] to 2.9 release. > > There are not a lot of changes in code but It's a critical fix for the > ability to launch ignite in lamba on Azure(There are not any workaround). > > So if nobody minds let's merge it to 2.9. > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13013 > > -- > Best regards, > Anton Kalashnikov > > > > 28.08.2020, 11:16, "Alex Plehanov" <plehanov.a...@gmail.com>: > > Guys, > > > > We have benchmarked 2.9 without IGNITE-13060 and IGNITE-12568 (reverted > it > > locally) and got the same performance as on 2.8.1 > > > > IGNITE-13060 (Tracing) - some code was added to hot paths, to trace these > > hot paths, it's clear why we have performance drop here. > > > > IGNITE-12568 (MessageFactory refactoring) - switch/case block was > > refactored to an array of message suppliers. The message factory is on > the > > hot path, which explains why this commit has an impact on total > > performance. > > I've checked JIT assembly output, done some JMH microbenchmarks, and > found > > that old implementation of MessageFactory.create() about 30-35% faster > than > > the new one. The reason - approach with switch/case can effectively > inline > > message creation code, but with an array of suppliers relatively heavy > > "invokeinterface" cannot be skipped. I've tried to rewrite the code using > > an abstract class for suppliers instead of an interface (to > > replace "invokeinterface" with the "invokevirtual"), but it gives back > only > > 10% of method performance and in this case, code looks ugly (lambdas > can't > > be used). Currently, I can't find any more ways to optimize the current > > approach (except return to the switch/case block). Andrey Gura, as the > > author of IGNITE-12568, maybe you have some ideas about optimization? > > > > Perhaps we should revert IGNITE-12568, but there are some metrics already > > created, which can't be rewritten using old message factory > implementation > > (IGNITE-12756). Guys, WDYT? > > > > пт, 28 авг. 2020 г. в 01:52, Denis Magda <dma...@apache.org>: > > > >> Looks beautiful and easy to use, thanks, Artem! Could you please add > the > >> following copyright to the footer of the pages? > >> > >> *© 2020 The Apache Software Foundation.* > >> *Apache, Apache Ignite, the Apache feather and the Apache Ignite logo > are > >> either registered trademarks or trademarks of The Apache Software > >> Foundation. * > >> *Privacy Policy* > >> > >> - > >> Denis > >> > >> On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 5:20 AM Artem Budnikov < > >> a.budnikov.ign...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> Hi everyone, > >>> > >>> We published the draft of Ignite 2.9 documentation on the Apache > Ignite > >>> web-site. The docs are available via the following link: > >>> > >>> > https://ignite.apache.org/docs/2.9.0/installation/installing-using-docker > >>> > >>> Alex, > >>> > >>> Is there an estimate for the release date? > >>> > >>> -Artem > >>> > >>> On 26.08.2020 17:47, Alex Plehanov wrote: > >>> > Denis, > >>> > > >>> > Currently, we are running mostly IgnitePutTxImplicitBenchmark > without > >>> > persistence. For other benchmarks drop is lower and it's harder to > find > >>> > problematic commit. > >>> > > >>> > ср, 26 авг. 2020 г. в 17:34, Denis Magda <dma...@apache.org>: > >>> > > >>> >> Alex, > >>> >> > >>> >> Thanks for sending an update. The drop is quite big. What are the > >>> types of > >>> >> benchmarks you are observing the degradation for (atomic puts, > >>> >> transactions, sql, etc.)? > >>> >> > >>> >> Let us know if any help by particular committers is required. > >>> >> > >>> >> - > >>> >> Denis > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 12:26 AM Alex Plehanov < > >>> plehanov.a...@gmail.com> > >>> >> wrote: > >>> >> > >>> >>> Hello, guys! > >>> >>> > >>> >>> We finally have some benchmark results. Looks like there is more > than > >>> one > >>> >>> commit with a performance drop. Detected drops for those commits > only > >>> >>> slightly higher than measurement error, so it was hard to find > them > >>> and > >>> >> we > >>> >>> are not completely sure we found them all and found them right. > >>> >>> > >>> >>> Drops detected: > >>> >>> 2-3% drop on commit 99b0e0143e0 (IGNITE-13060 Tracing: initial > >>> >>> implementation) > >>> >>> 2-3% drop on commit 65c30ec6947 (IGNITE-12568 MessageFactory is > >>> >> refactored > >>> >>> in order to detect registration of message with the same direct > type) > >>> >>> > >>> >>> The total drop we have on our environment - 7-8% and perhaps > there is > >>> >>> something else here (benchmarks still in progress, I will write > if we > >>> >> find > >>> >>> more suspected commits). > >>> >>> > >>> >>> Ivan Artiukhov, can you please recheck mentioned above commits on > your > >>> >>> environment? > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> чт, 20 авг. 2020 г. в 11:43, Ilya Kasnacheev < > >>> ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com > >>> >>> : > >>> >>> > >>> >>>> Hello! > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> Readme.io uses blue book :) > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/performance-tips > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> I was thinking of something along a blue circle with `i' in it, > for > >>> >>>> information items. > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> Regards, > >>> >>>> -- > >>> >>>> Ilya Kasnacheev > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> ср, 19 авг. 2020 г. в 18:29, Artem Budnikov < > >>> >> a.budnikov.ign...@gmail.com > >>> >>>> : > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>>>> Search does not seem to work. > >>> >>>>> It uses mockups right now, but it should be ready when the docs > are > >>> >>>>> released. > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>>> I can see that note blocks are just annotated with "Note." Can > we > >>> >>> have > >>> >>>>> some > >>> >>>>>> image there? > >>> >>>>> Do you have a preference as to which image you would like to see > >>> >> there? > >>> >>>>> -Artem > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> On 19.08.2020 17:37, Ilya Kasnacheev wrote: > >>> >>>>>> Hello! > >>> >>>>>> > >>> >>>>>> Search does not seem to work. Are we going to have a proper > search > >>> >>>>> results > >>> >>>>>> page? It is often the case that there's none. > >>> >>>>>> > >>> >>>>>> I can see that note blocks are just annotated with "Note." Can > we > >>> >>> have > >>> >>>>> some > >>> >>>>>> image there? Example is > >>> >>>>>> http://64.227.57.229/docs/2.9.0/persistence/persistence-tuning > >>> >>>>>> > >>> >>>>>> Regards, > -- Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy
