-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 >> The problem's that Freenet *doesn't* even use the amount of memory I >> provide it with (I'm yet to see it use more than 120 megs out of 320 I >> allow for the heap). I'd be willing to dedicate as much memory as >> required if only it'd help. > > Well, a major objective of the db4o rewrite was precisely this. And I don't > see that this is a problem - the OS will use the rest to cache the node.db4o > file so that only writes need to go to disk.
Yes, this I understand. I was one of those complaining of Freenet using too much RAM :-(. But, IMO, using as much memory as possible (out of the dedicated pool) could be important for performance. For example, by increasing buffer sizes in db4o we can possibly make flushes more "organized", reducing disk writes substantially. I wonder if there are ways to tune db4o performance without rewriting the code, are there any handles to turn in the db4o config? > I have seagate 1TB disks mirrored, may explain the difference. Unlikely, IMO. 1 Tb drives should have better throughput, but Freenet is definitely limited by seek times, which should be only marginally better. >> My thinking exactly. Would providing you with a snapshot of CPU/memory >> performance under YourKit Profiler (I have academic licenses for both >> 7.5 and 8.0, IIRC) or VisualVM (which is now a part of the JDK >> distributive) on my machine help? Any logging I can turn on to help? >> BTW, I have logging set to ERROR for now, as with NORMAL level it logs >> ~2Mb per minute, adding noticeably to overall disk contention. > > No, because it's an I/O problem, not a CPU/memory problem! I was thinking more about allocation/invocation counts, available in both profilers. Perhaps some method/query is being called unexpectedly often, or a certain object is being persisted too often, etc. Also, it could be that a certain method blocks too often and for too much time in Windows, leading to poor I/O performance. But it's a long shot, this I agree with. Regards, Victor Denisov. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFKAdMB1O5++4rTuI0RAi/tAKC8SIIIeUVlQzYtntg22Uxjywp59ACdG5zQ ICyGAM6ubeh6I8JFIDwkjLs= =9uoG -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
