@johannes:
as mentioned yesterday you have to move EntityTransaction#begin and
EntityTransaction#commit into the for-loop.

regards,
gerhard



2017-06-01 12:58 GMT+02:00 Thomas Andraschko <[email protected]>:

> Hi,
>
> ~1 year ago i did many optimizations in the data module and AFAIR DS Data
> was only a little bit slower.
> After i compared my testcase with a benchmark from a user, the big
> different came from the transaction handling which was different in both
> testcases.
>
> Regards,
> Thomas
>
> 2017-06-01 12:33 GMT+02:00 Gerhard Petracek <[email protected]>:
>
> > hi johannes,
> >
> > after refactoring your initial code to ds-test-control i saw e.g. ~6s vs
> > 7,5s for 2560 iterations.
> > i'll compare my local version with your new version (mentioned in your
> > mail).
> >
> > regards,
> > gerhard
> >
> >
> >
> > 2017-06-01 11:35 GMT+02:00 Schäfer, Johannes <[email protected]>:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > My company is thinking about using DeltaSpike Data. But before we
> > > integrate this into our development I was asked to prepare some
> > benchmarks,
> > > comparing the usage of DeltaSpike Data with the usage of a plain
> > > EntityManager.
> > > I prepared some benchmarks and I was surprised that there is a big
> > > difference in the write performance. I already got some hints in the
> > delta
> > > spike irc channel, but the performance is still bad.
> > > Based on a template from os890 I implemented my tests and prepared a
> > > github project.
> > > https://github.com/johannesschaefer/javaee_jsf_
> cdi_jpa_data_ds_project_
> > > template
> > > Basically I'm talking about this test:
> > > https://github.com/johannesschaefer/javaee_jsf_
> cdi_jpa_data_ds_project_
> > > template/blob/master/src/test/java/de/psi/metals/futurelab/
> > > repo/benchmark/SaveTest.java
> > >
> > > It just saves an entity into a DB in a loop. Depending of the number of
> > > iterations the difference is quite big.
> > >
> > > SaveTest
> > > ____________________________________________________________
> > > ____________________________________________________________
> > > _____________________________
> > > |   | iter 10    | iter 20    | iter 40    | iter 80    | iter 160   |
> > > iter 320   | iter 640   | iter 1280  | iter 2560  | iter 5120   | iter
> > > 10240  |
> > > |===========================================================
> > > ============================================================
> > > =============================|
> > > | DS| 0.004911746| 0.03597043 | 0.015765787| 0.016966639| 0.043319612|
> > > 0.281807839| 1.308948835| 1.370535533| 8.186996818| 20.920141274|
> > > 93.631768475|
> > > | EM| 0.004557839| 0.003256631| 0.005775416| 0.004834958| 0.028243393|
> > > 0.035484616| 0.038600595| 0.088904458| 0.339158674| 0.745850523 |
> > > 0.853543234 |
> > >
> > > Also the difference between a run with 5120 and 10240 iteration is not
> > > just the double amount of time, it is more than 4 times more.
> > >
> > > Do you have some hints to me what I'm doing wrong there?
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > Johannes
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to