For postgres test I mean initial jdbc query and result set traversal. For Ignite I mean sql query and iterator traversal. Also it would be interesting to see result of *SELECT count(*) from the query above in both cases.*
2016-05-25 12:00 GMT+03:00 Tomek W <rrrtomtom...@gmail.com>: > [image: Obraz w treści 1] > > What code do you mean ? JDBC client ? > > 2016-05-25 10:25 GMT+02:00 Alexei Scherbakov <alexey.scherbak...@gmail.com > >: > >> What's the batch size for postgresql ? >> What's the size of one entry ? >> Could you provide the test code for both postgres and Ignite (just the >> query + read with the time estimation) ? >> >> 2016-05-25 11:13 GMT+03:00 Tomek W <rrrtomtom...@gmail.com>: >> >>> | How many entries are downloaded to the client in both cases? >>> 3000 000 >>> >>> | Do the both queries involve network I/O ? >>> No, I have only local one server (for testing purpose). >>> >>> >>> 2016-05-25 9:59 GMT+02:00 Alexei Scherbakov < >>> alexey.scherbak...@gmail.com>: >>> >>>> SELECT * is not really a good test query. >>>> It's result can be affected not only by engine performance. >>>> >>>> How many entries are downloaded to the client in both cases? >>>> Do the both queries involve network I/O ? >>>> >>>> 2016-05-25 7:58 GMT+03:00 Denis Magda <dma...@gridgain.com>: >>>> >>>>> In general Ignite is designed to be used in a distributed environment >>>>> when gigabytes or terabytes of dataset is spread across many cluster nodes >>>>> and SQL queries executed across the cluster should be faster since >>>>> resources of all the machines will be used and as a result a query should >>>>> be completed quicker. In your scenario you just have only a single cluster >>>>> node and in fact comparing performance of PostgreSQL and H2 (engine that >>>>> is >>>>> used by Ignite SQL) and I can consider that Ignite SQL can work slightly >>>>> slowly but this in is not Ignite usage scenario. >>>>> >>>>> However if you try to create a cluster of several nodes running on >>>>> different physical machines, pre-load gigabytes of data there and compare >>>>> Ignite SQL and PostgresSQL you should see performance improvements on >>>>> Ignite side. >>>>> >>>>> In any case taking into account the advise above do the following: >>>>> - execute “EXPLAIN” query to see that the index is chose properly [1]; >>>>> - H2 console will allow you to see how fast a query is presently >>>>> executed on a single node removing several Ignite layers [2]; >>>>> - check if you have any GC pauses during query execution since it can >>>>> affect execution time [3] >>>>> >>>>> Also share the objects you use as keys and values. >>>>> >>>>> [1] https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/sql-queries#using-explain >>>>> [2] >>>>> https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/sql-queries#using-h2-debug-console >>>>> [3] >>>>> https://apacheignite.readme.io/v1.6/docs/jvm-and-system-tuning#section-detailed-garbage-collection-stats >>>>> >>>>> — >>>>> Denis >>>>> >>>>> On May 25, 2016, at 3:23 AM, Tomek W <rrrtomtom...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> +==============================================================================================+ >>>>> | Node ID8(@), IP | CPUs | Heap Used | CPU Load | Up Time >>>>> | Size | Hi/Mi/Rd/Wr | >>>>> >>>>> +==============================================================================================+ >>>>> | 0F0AAF99(@n0), 127.0.0.1 | 8 | 54.50 % | 3.23 % | 00:13:13:49 >>>>> | 3000000 | Hi: 0 | >>>>> | | | | | >>>>> | | Mi: 0 | >>>>> | | | | | >>>>> | | Rd: 0 | >>>>> | | | | | >>>>> | | Wr: 0 | >>>>> >>>>> +----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I followed your hints. Actually, client doesn't require such many >>>>> memory as before - thanks for it. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> When it comes to configuration of server, I also followed your hints, >>>>> results: >>>>> >>>>> Querying is done by JDBC Client. In ignite and postgresql I have >>>>> single index on column A. >>>>> >>>>> Ignite: SELECT * FROM table WHERE A > 1345 takes 6s. >>>>> Postgres: SELECT * FROM table WHERE A > 1345 takes 4s. >>>>> >>>>> As you can see, postgres is still bettter than Ignite. I show you >>>>> significant fragments of my configuration: >>>>> http://pastebin.com/EQC4JPWR >>>>> >>>>> And xml for server file: >>>>> http://pastebin.com/enR9h5J4 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Try to consider why postgresql is still better, please. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> Best regards, >>>> Alexei Scherbakov >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> >> Best regards, >> Alexei Scherbakov >> > > -- Best regards, Alexei Scherbakov
