Re: [infinispan-dev] moving asyncMarshalling to jgroups

2012-01-20 Thread Galder Zamarreño
The last person I remember testing async marshalling extensively was Craig Bomba who was indeed the one to spot the re-ordering. I can't remember 100% cos we discussed this on IRC, but I think he used to see a nice performance improvement with async marshalling, but I think the reordering made

Re: [infinispan-dev] moving asyncMarshalling to jgroups

2012-01-19 Thread Bela Ban
This may not give you any performance increase: #1 In my experience, serialization is way faster than de-serialization. Unless you're doing something fancy in your serializer #2 Assuming that the serialization thread pool has a bounded queue/size, by pushing the serialization further down the

Re: [infinispan-dev] moving asyncMarshalling to jgroups

2012-01-19 Thread Galder Zamarreño
On Jan 19, 2012, at 3:43 PM, Bela Ban wrote: This may not give you any performance increase: #1 In my experience, serialization is way faster than de-serialization. Unless you're doing something fancy in your serializer No. I think Mircea didn't explain this very well. What really

Re: [infinispan-dev] moving asyncMarshalling to jgroups

2012-01-19 Thread Mircea Markus
On 19 Jan 2012, at 17:36, Galder Zamarreño wrote: On Jan 19, 2012, at 3:43 PM, Bela Ban wrote: This may not give you any performance increase: #1 In my experience, serialization is way faster than de-serialization. Unless you're doing something fancy in your serializer No. I

Re: [infinispan-dev] moving asyncMarshalling to jgroups

2012-01-19 Thread Bela Ban
On 1/19/12 6:36 PM, Galder Zamarreño wrote: On Jan 19, 2012, at 3:43 PM, Bela Ban wrote: This may not give you any performance increase: #1 In my experience, serialization is way faster than de-serialization. Unless you're doing something fancy in your serializer No. I think Mircea

Re: [infinispan-dev] moving asyncMarshalling to jgroups

2012-01-19 Thread Manik Surtani
On 20 Jan 2012, at 01:12, Bela Ban wrote: On 1/19/12 6:36 PM, Galder Zamarreño wrote: On Jan 19, 2012, at 3:43 PM, Bela Ban wrote: This may not give you any performance increase: #1 In my experience, serialization is way faster than de-serialization. Unless you're doing

Re: [infinispan-dev] moving asyncMarshalling to jgroups

2012-01-19 Thread Mircea Markus
On 19 Jan 2012, at 19:42, Bela Ban wrote: On 1/19/12 6:36 PM, Galder Zamarreño wrote: On Jan 19, 2012, at 3:43 PM, Bela Ban wrote: This may not give you any performance increase: #1 In my experience, serialization is way faster than de-serialization. Unless you're doing something

Re: [infinispan-dev] moving asyncMarshalling to jgroups

2012-01-19 Thread Dan Berindei
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 7:46 PM, Mircea Markus mircea.mar...@jboss.com wrote: On 19 Jan 2012, at 17:36, Galder Zamarreño wrote: On Jan 19, 2012, at 3:43 PM, Bela Ban wrote: This may not give you any performance increase: #1 In my experience, serialization is way faster than

Re: [infinispan-dev] moving asyncMarshalling to jgroups

2012-01-19 Thread Mircea Markus
Are you sure about this Mircea? AFAIK the message is always sent by JGroups from our thread (either the user thread or the async transport thread). The only difference between sync (GET_ALL) and async calls (GET_NONE) at the JGroups level is that with GET_NONE that thread doesn't wait for the