Tolga, this looks like you do cache.get() and key resides on remote node. So, yes, local node waits for response from remote node.
--Yakov 2017-02-21 10:23 GMT+03:00 Tolga Kavukcu <[email protected]>: > Hi Val,Everyone > > I am able to overcome with write behind issue and can process exteremly > fast in single node. But when i switched to multinode with partitioned > mode. My threads waiting at some condition. There are 16 threads processing > data all waits at same trace. Adding the thread dump. > > java.lang.Thread.State: WAITING (parking) > at sun.misc.Unsafe.park(Native Method) > - parking to wait for <0x0000000711093898> (a org.apache.ignite.internal. > processors.cache.distributed.dht.GridPartitionedSingleGetFuture) > at java.util.concurrent.locks.LockSupport.park(LockSupport.java:175) > at java.util.concurrent.locks.AbstractQueuedSynchronizer. > parkAndCheckInterrupt(AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.java:836) > at java.util.concurrent.locks.AbstractQueuedSynchronizer. > doAcquireSharedInterruptibly(AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.java:997) > at java.util.concurrent.locks.AbstractQueuedSynchronizer. > acquireSharedInterruptibly(AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.java:1304) > at org.apache.ignite.internal.util.future.GridFutureAdapter. > get0(GridFutureAdapter.java:161) > at org.apache.ignite.internal.util.future.GridFutureAdapter. > get(GridFutureAdapter.java:119) > at org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.distributed. > dht.atomic.GridDhtAtomicCache.get0(GridDhtAtomicCache.java:487) > at org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.GridCacheAdapter.get( > GridCacheAdapter.java:4629) > at org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.GridCacheAdapter.get( > GridCacheAdapter.java:1386) > at org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.IgniteCacheProxy.get( > IgniteCacheProxy.java:1118) > at com.intellica.evam.engine.cache.dao.ScenarioCacheDao. > getCurrentScenarioRecord(ScenarioCacheDao.java:35) > > What might be the reason of the problem. Does it waits for a response from > other node ? > > -Regards. > > On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 7:31 AM, Tolga Kavukcu <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Hi Val, >> >> Thanks for your tip, with enough memory i believe write-behind queue can >> handle peak times. >> >> Thanks. >> >> Regards. >> >> On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 10:44 PM, vkulichenko < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi Tolga, >>> >>> There is a back-pressure mechanism to ensure that node doesn't run out of >>> memory because of too long write behind queue. You can try increasing >>> writeBehindFlushSize property to relax it. >>> >>> -Val >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.705 >>> 18.x6.nabble.com/Cache-write-behind-optimization-tp10527p10531.html >>> Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> *Tolga KAVUKÇU* >> > > > > -- > > *Tolga KAVUKÇU* >
