I don't think the batching strategies actually changed when we moved to load plans.
Is the problem that each loader is taking considerably more memory? On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 5:41 AM, Guillaume Smet <guillaume.s...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 11:48 AM, Sanne Grinovero <sa...@hibernate.org> > wrote: > > > thanks for investigating. Steve in chat mentioned the option of > > creating these EntityLoaders lazily: as while they need to be reused, > > it's possible many of them are never really used. > > > > I think that's a very interesting observation, is that what you plan to > > explore? > > > > Yes, it's one of the things we should explore. > > > > I see two difficulties: > > - you'd need thredsafe code, yet we don't want barriers on this area. > > Will probably need features such as lazy set, yet these would need > > even more objects allocated if you're not careful. > > - we always prefer fail-at-boot validation, so we'd need to make sure > > even if you don't build them all, we can at least make sure we'll be > > able to build them later. > > > > Well, the idea is to prototype something on the memory usage front, then we > can discuss further what we want to do with it and if it's worth refining > it and spending more time on it. > > If we end up choosing this path, be sure we'll be bugging you for advice on > concurrency and performance :). > > > > Additionally there's the idea to see if any such Loader instance could > > be reused - probably using a cache which we clear at end of bootstrap > > - yet since Steve mentioned this would be a significant change let's > > not try to push it in 5.3. > > > > Finally, a simple one: I have the impression that loader's Map could > > be made into a plain array, or a custom structure which would then be > > ideal to support lazy creation of loaders. With the exception of two > > special strings - which will needt to be treated specially - all other > > keys are enums. > > > > Yeah, I'll play with a few ideas and see what I can do. I'm not yet sure if > not knowing the code base will be a thing in my favor or not. At least I > don't have preconceived ideas :]. > > > > Whatever you choose to try, let's keep significant changes for 6 only :) > > > > Steve was saying that this whole thing wouldn't be an issue in 6. > > -- > Guillaume > _______________________________________________ > hibernate-dev mailing list > hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev > _______________________________________________ hibernate-dev mailing list hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
