Re: Oak 1.0.29 vs 1.4.10 memory mapping.

[Alex Parvulescu]

Hi,

To give more background this came about during an investigation into a slow
offline compaction but it may affect any running FileStore as well (to be
verified).
I don't think it's related to oak-run itself, but more with the way we map
files, and so far it looks like a bug (there is no reasonable explanation
for mapping each tar file twice).

Took a quick look at the TarReader but there are not many changes in this
area 1.0 vs. 1.4 branches.
If no one has better ideas, I'll create an oak issue and investigate this a
bit further.

thanks,
alex


On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 4:28 PM, Ian Boston  wrote:

> Hi,
> I am looking at Oak-run and I see 2x the mapped memory between 1.0.29 and
> 1.4.10. It looks like in 1.0.29 each segment file is mapped into memory
> once, but in 1.4.10 its mapped into memory 2x.
>
> Is this expected ?
>
> Its not great for page faults.
> Best Regards
> Ian
>

Re: oak-benchmarks and oak-run

[Angela Schreiber]

Hi Davide

Just had a first look: there are some scripts inside oak-run that can be
used to run benchmarks (which I actually do regularly). those are missing
in your fork oak-benchmarks module. Please make sure you move them as
well... i will also add this to the issue.

Thanks
Angela

On 22/03/17 16:18, "Davide Giannella"  wrote:

>Hello Team,
>
>as was discussed on OAK-3134[0], as part of [1] I'm going through the
>effort of moving the benchmarks we have in oak-run into their own
>module. This should allow us to then remove the dependencies from
>oak-run that by the investigation making the size of the module big.
>
>(0)
>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fissues.ap
>ache.org%2Fjira%2Fbrowse%2FOAK-3134%3FfocusedCommentId%3D15867631%26page%3
>Dcom.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel%23comm
>ent-15867631=02%7C01%7C%7Ce3dc16d7d89e413b7f7e08d47136aa01%7Cfa7b1b5a
>7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636257926970776627=y1Vu92RlszXj1y
>geXQJ68jPuL22QmbfVSzNRtFMq5wY%3D=0
>(1) 
>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fissues.ap
>ache.org%2Fjira%2Fbrowse%2FOAK-3342=02%7C01%7C%7Ce3dc16d7d89e413b7f7e
>08d47136aa01%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C6362579269707866
>35=TM7QP3bhEhsJTxm2c7A3cNjKeqq%2FBduEtvrUdf%2FIy4Y%3D=0
>
>It resulted in quite refactoring of things around and before I actually
>produce a final patch for review and therefore I will have seen the
>oak-run size to drop, I'm kindly asking if you could start having a look
>at the work I've been doing [2] and provide feedbacks or questions if
>needed. Even on the ticket itself[1].
>
>(2)
>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.co
>m%2Fdavidegiannella%2Fjackrabbit-oak%2Fcommits%2Foak-benchmarks%3Fauthor%3
>Ddavidegiannella=02%7C01%7C%7Ce3dc16d7d89e413b7f7e08d47136aa01%7Cfa7b
>1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636257926970786635=YmABzxRXmB
>4C6eCnFnVyU8ygqJ%2BiVVhsaq9lmNpJka8%3D=0
>
>Cheers
>Davide
>
>

Oak 1.0.29 vs 1.4.10 memory mapping.

[Ian Boston]

Hi,
I am looking at Oak-run and I see 2x the mapped memory between 1.0.29 and
1.4.10. It looks like in 1.0.29 each segment file is mapped into memory
once, but in 1.4.10 its mapped into memory 2x.

Is this expected ?

Its not great for page faults.
Best Regards
Ian

oak-benchmarks and oak-run

[Davide Giannella]

Hello Team,

as was discussed on OAK-3134[0], as part of [1] I'm going through the
effort of moving the benchmarks we have in oak-run into their own
module. This should allow us to then remove the dependencies from
oak-run that by the investigation making the size of the module big.

(0)
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3134?focusedCommentId=15867631=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15867631
(1) https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3342

It resulted in quite refactoring of things around and before I actually
produce a final patch for review and therefore I will have seen the
oak-run size to drop, I'm kindly asking if you could start having a look
at the work I've been doing [2] and provide feedbacks or questions if
needed. Even on the ticket itself[1].

(2)
https://github.com/davidegiannella/jackrabbit-oak/commits/oak-benchmarks?author=davidegiannella

Cheers
Davide

Re: [site] Reorganize the side rail to show child pages

[Davide Giannella]

On 21/03/2017 15:17, Chetan Mehrotra wrote:
> Hope the current changes are ok to publish! Thoughts?
+1
D.