I have no idea what this line is doing in detail, but I got the same speed 
now as if I restart

echo 3 | sudo tee /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches


Just want to share it with you.

Am Donnerstag, 20. November 2014 14:37:23 UTC+1 schrieb Curtis Mosters:
>
> Yeah reboot is working fine. Now I get the uncached time again with it.
>
> But rebooting takes so many time and I have to reconnect again and again 
> via shell.
>
> I also tried sync. But when I type it nothing happens. Also searched for a 
> way to use it, but it seems that noone has a good solution there.
>
> Docker and vagrant I never tried, but sounds like a good solution.
>
> And btw I know that this test here might not be the very best. But since 
> Neo4j does not kill the cache I have to do it this way. Otherwhise I cannot 
> compare it to my other database. The one is clearing cache by shutdown. 
> That's how it should be I think.
>
> Thanks Michael
>
> Am Donnerstag, 20. November 2014 11:54:24 UTC+1 schrieb Michael Hunger:
>>
>> As this is *operating system caches* we're talking about, you can try 
>> "sync" on unix.
>>
>> Or reboot.
>>
>> It might also work to run Neo4j in a container (docker, vagrant) and 
>> restart / resume that container.
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 9:29 AM, 'Curtis Mosters' via Neo4j <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Yeah but the issue is that I have 10 comparisons. Each having let's say 
>>> the 10 same words to search for.
>>>
>>> So after the first search Neo4j already knows where they are and is 
>>> faster now. That's the issue I have. Real word is something else, where you 
>>> would change those words. But I don't want to think always about new words 
>>> to search for.
>>>
>>> So clearing cache would be way better. IS there really no way to do it?
>>>
>>> Also tried* killall -9 java*, but not working.
>>> Also followed On linux, see: http://linux-mm.org/Drop_Caches 
>>> <http://www.google.com/url?q=http%3A%2F%2Flinux-mm.org%2FDrop_Caches&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNGlvcLH54xciQ5X723RMpzCoWQfBg>
>>>  
>>> but nothing happens?
>>>
>>> Am Mittwoch, 19. November 2014 22:55:23 UTC+1 schrieb Michael Hunger:
>>>>
>>>> But for realistic use-cases you will have exactly that setup, that you 
>>>> have hot data in your OS' file-system and also database caches,
>>>>
>>>> that is the state you want to reach for real benchmarks as this 
>>>> represents the real world usage, not the cold caches after a computer and 
>>>> database start.
>>>>
>>>> The cold cache numbers can be completely ignored imho as they only 
>>>> measure the speed of the disk and the loading mechanism of the FS and 
>>>> database to get data loaded.
>>>>
>>>> Same goes for JVM JIT and other optimizations that happen behind the 
>>>> scenes (by OS, JVM, DB)
>>>>
>>>> Michael
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 9:37 PM, Jacob Hansson <[email protected]
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hey mate,
>>>>>
>>>>> yeah, this does clarify it. It is very likely that what is happening 
>>>>> is that the OS is caching the index files in RAM, so the second time you 
>>>>> run the database (even after a restart), it does not have to hit disk. 
>>>>> You 
>>>>> could verify that this is the case by evicting the OS page cache between 
>>>>> your benchmarks. What OS are you using?
>>>>>
>>>>> On linux, see: http://linux-mm.org/Drop_Caches
>>>>> On mac, you should be able to run 'purge' to clear the caches, see: 
>>>>> http://www.cnet.com/news/purge-the-os-x-disk-cache-to-
>>>>> analyze-memory-usage/
>>>>>
>>>>> For windows there does not seem to be a vendor-provided mechanism to 
>>>>> do this, see here for alternatives: http://
>>>>> stackoverflow.com/questions/7405868/how-to-invalidate-the-
>>>>> file-system-cache
>>>>>
>>>>> /jake
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 12:25 PM, 'Curtis Mosters' via Neo4j <
>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Jacob, well yeah here is an example:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> START n=node:titles("title:solar") RETURN count(*)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If I do this right after the import. It needs *180 sec*. But doing 
>>>>>> this a second time needs *3 sec* and after that again just needs 1,5 
>>>>>> sec, but after that there is no more improvement. Also after doing some 
>>>>>> stuff in the settings, I never get to the 180 sec again.=/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But if you think now it is just that word. No it's not. Also tested 9 
>>>>>> others and here it was lasting round about 60 sec, too. But searching 
>>>>>> again 
>>>>>> on them was 1-2 sec.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Also after restarting the Neo4j server it is still that fast (1-3 
>>>>>> sec). And yeah I need the uncached result time for my comparison. It is 
>>>>>> not 
>>>>>> correct if I continue now with cached things.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maybe now it's way clearer? If not just let me know. Thank you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am Mittwoch, 19. November 2014 18:35:38 UTC+1 schrieb Jacob Hansson:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Curtis,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> can you clarify what you mean by caching, and how you are 
>>>>>>> determining that things are getting cached?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you are talking about caching of the actual data, note that there 
>>>>>>> are several layers of caching - the OS will cache files in its page 
>>>>>>> cache, 
>>>>>>> for instance. If you want to work around that in your testing you need 
>>>>>>> to 
>>>>>>> ask the operating system to flush its caches.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> /j
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 7:36 AM, 'Curtis Mosters' via Neo4j <
>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Well for my Benchmark I need a clear Cache because otherwhise Neo4j 
>>>>>>>> is always caching and faking my results in a bad way.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So I tried:
>>>>>>>> cache_type=none
>>>>>>>> cache.memory_ratio=0.0
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> in the neo4j.properties. Had no real impact still caching.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Also found something from Michael with jconsole: 
>>>>>>>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/26189351/neo4j-server-
>>>>>>>> clear-the-cache-in-ram
>>>>>>>> But really no idea what he means. =( I meant the JMX call I found 
>>>>>>>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/12621963/clear-ehcache-
>>>>>>>> of-remote-server
>>>>>>>> But also not sure if it is the right thing to clear.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Here I found infos about the caching: http://neo4j.com/docs/stable/
>>>>>>>> configuration-caches.html
>>>>>>>> But nothing worked or was in my mind useful to test.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Then I gone through all settings here: 
>>>>>>>> http://neo4j.com/docs/stable/kernel-configuration.html
>>>>>>>> But yeah except the two lines above nothing looking satisfying. 
>>>>>>>> Even tried query_cache_size=0 but here I got a funny error message 
>>>>>>>> then, so 
>>>>>>>> yeah dunno what that setting means.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Then I was thinking that setting the neo_mapping stuff to 0 might 
>>>>>>>> help. But then I found http://grokbase.com/t/gg/neo4j
>>>>>>>> /1312y592r4/caching-the-whole-graph which says that setting to 0 
>>>>>>>> is like limiting to infinity.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ohman so nothing worked to disable the cache. Why is it so hard to 
>>>>>>>> give a setting disable cache or clearing the cache after server is 
>>>>>>>> shut 
>>>>>>>> down.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Really need this =/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thank you
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>>>>>>>> Groups "Neo4j" group.
>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, 
>>>>>>>> send an email to [email protected].
>>>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  -- 
>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>>>>>> Groups "Neo4j" group.
>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, 
>>>>>> send an email to [email protected].
>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>  -- 
>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>>>>> Groups "Neo4j" group.
>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
>>>>> an email to [email protected].
>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  -- 
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>>> Groups "Neo4j" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
>>> an email to [email protected].
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>
>>
>>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Neo4j" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to