On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 7:30 PM, Amit Kumar <[email protected]> wrote:

> Ok, disabling the auto-indexer and all indices I am creating. Still no
> great gains. One thing I am doing is -
>
> Sounds complicated and unnecessary, what's the reason for that approach?


> 1. A logic that creates temporary vertices/edges in a transaction
> 2. calls another logic for it to proceed by seeing the presence of those
> vertices
> 3. Once call 2 finishes its logic, transaction in 1 is rolled back
> 4. As a result of step 2 completion, an asynchronous thread attempts to
> create more vertices/edges and commits this transaction.
>
> I suspect that the fake creation of nodes as part of step 1 for step 2 to
> proceed and then rolling it back is the one which is trying to slow down
> things....
>

Can't you do that in memory? I think moving decision making logic into the
transactional system (which includes disk flushes on commit) is not the
fastest way of guaranteeing.

>
>
> On Sunday, December 7, 2014 12:23:01 PM UTC-5, Michael Hunger wrote:
>>
>> There are a lot of factors in play that affect performance:
>>
>> - virtualization and ceph
>> - tinkerpop indirection
>> - not sure about the batch-size of your updates
>> - # of indexes, esp. if you have both schema indexes as well as
>> relationship-indexes (I guess you don't need most of them)
>>
>> -> my suggestions would be:
>> - measure the virtualization impact if it affects operations too much
>> move closer to a real machine
>> - remove the indexes you don't really need, premature indexing is not
>> useful, evaluate if you really need them to *find initial nodes*
>>
>> *after* you tried those two and if it doesn't get better please come
>> back with your graph.db/messages.log ; data-model, data-size and queries
>>
>> Michael
>>
>> On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 5:52 PM, Chris Vest <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> My guess would be that it’s the index updates that are taking time. It’s
>>> usually the case for any database that supports secondary indexes, that
>>> they trade write performance for read performance.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Chris Vest
>>> System Engineer, Neo Technology
>>> [ skype: mr.chrisvest, twitter: chvest ]
>>>
>>>
>>> On 07 Dec 2014, at 07:25, Amit Kumar <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello Experts,
>>>
>>> Need guidance on a critical issue I am facing. Using tinkerpop
>>> blueprints 2.5 with community neo4j embedded mode, I am seeing gradual
>>> (very noticeable) performance hit while inserting a bunch of vertices and
>>> edges (< 50 vertices and 70 edges) in one iteration. The program is
>>> building vertices/edges based on business logic.
>>>
>>> Have tried setting cache_type to none, and have indices on almost all
>>> properties of vertices as well as edges with auto-indexer on. The first
>>> load (on a clean database) takes < 1 second for < 100 vertices and < 120
>>> edges. Subsequent idempotent loads are getting slower by almost 800 milli
>>> seconds (inconsistent). However, the time taken keeps increasing when the
>>> database grows.
>>>
>>> NOTE: Program runs on a VM with data storage for the graph on CEPH.
>>> There is NO fancy gremlin queries etc while trying to determine if a
>>> vertex/edge already exists before inserting.
>>>
>>> Need quick help. Thanks in advance.
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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