On 4 May 2018 at 19:45, Gail Badner <gbad...@redhat.com> wrote: > 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?
Yes that's right. > > 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
