[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-10351?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17332255#comment-17332255
]
David Li commented on ARROW-10351:
----------------------------------
I do see an improvement when both comparisons are on this branch, but with the
#define toggled. That is, using a background thread helps performance when
compression is enabled. However, I don't see a benefit compared to not using
compression, which is what I was interested in.
I'll try to test the 3 cases here (no compression, compression, compression
with background thread) on a pair of EC2 instances when I get a chance -
testing over localhost probably isn't the fairest comparison.
> [C++][Flight] See if reading/writing to gRPC get/put streams asynchronously
> helps performance
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: ARROW-10351
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-10351
> Project: Apache Arrow
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: C++, FlightRPC
> Reporter: Wes McKinney
> Priority: Major
>
> We don't use any asynchronous concepts in the way that Flight is implemented
> now, i.e. IPC deconstruction/reconstruction (which may include compression!)
> is not performed concurrent with moving FlightData objects through the gRPC
> machinery, which may yield suboptimal performance.
> It might be better to apply an actor-type approach where a dedicated thread
> retrieves and prepares the next raw IPC message (within a Future) while the
> current IPC message is being processed -- that way reading/writing to/from
> the gRPC stream is not blocked on the IPC code doing its thing.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
