Sorry, just noticed that you already use field values as cache keys. But simplifying counters to ints instead of HashMaps of HashSets is probably still makes sense to try.
Sergi 2015-09-01 19:19 GMT+03:00 Sergi Vladykin <[email protected]>: > By the way you can also use field id (just number your fields from 0 to > 27) instead of storing field names in counter keys, it will give some > serialization speedup and better memory utilization. > > Sergi > > 2015-09-01 19:10 GMT+03:00 Sergi Vladykin <[email protected]>: > >> As I see you have your field names as keys, you can think of them as >> locks. >> I mean that your scalability is limited by these 27 locks and you are >> acquiring them all for each cache update. >> How many threads do you use for your latency test? >> I'd suggest to use something like tuple (fieldName, fieldValue) as key >> and >> just an integer (number of such keys) as value which must be incremented >> or set to 1 if none. >> >> Sergi >> >> >> 2015-09-01 17:38 GMT+03:00 javadevmtl <[email protected]>: >> >>> Sorry for the confusion... >>> >>> So... >>> >>> - Just to be clear running 1.3.0 on 2 nodes with total of 64 cores and >>> 256GB >>> of RAM >>> - Cache is configured as off-heap partitioned no backups with 96GB and >>> each >>> node is started as -Xmx4g >>> - Each app is a web server that receives json request that parses the >>> json >>> and inserts the json properties as different keys (27 total). >>> - Requests are load balanced to both nodes. >>> >>> All times quoted below includes full business logic and network time. The >>> json payload sent always contains the 27 properties. Only the app is >>> recompiled to either invokeAll() for 1 key 3 keys, 9 keys etc... >>> >>> Also time remains constant from 0 records inserted all the way up to >>> millions (so at least this is good thing) which also means java is >>> sufficiently warmed up with millions of calls. >>> >>> 01 keys: 2ms >>> 03 keys: 4ms >>> 09 keys: 9ms >>> 18 keys: 16ms >>> 27 keys: 25ms >>> >>> I was maybe hopping slightly better latency... Here is the code maybe you >>> have suggestions on improvements? >>> >>> http://pastebin.com/pR36DwdG >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> View this message in context: >>> http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Is-invokeAll-considered-a-batch-operation-tp1220p1238.html >>> Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>> >> >> >
