Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-db-ojb-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 29643 invoked from network); 2 Nov 2003 16:32:10 -0000 Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (208.185.179.12) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Nov 2003 16:32:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 92086 invoked by uid 500); 2 Nov 2003 16:32:03 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-db-ojb-dev-archive@db.apache.org Received: (qmail 92064 invoked by uid 500); 2 Nov 2003 16:32:02 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "OJB Developers List" Reply-To: "OJB Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list ojb-dev@db.apache.org Received: (qmail 92049 invoked from network); 2 Nov 2003 16:32:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO logos.org.ua) (82.146.43.76) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Nov 2003 16:32:02 -0000 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([213.130.8.200]) (authenticated bits=0) by logos.org.ua (8.12.10/8.12.8) with ESMTP id hA2GVopF012078 for ; Sun, 2 Nov 2003 18:31:55 +0200 (EET) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" From: Oleg Nitz Reply-To: on@ukr.net To: "OJB Developers List" Subject: Re: Performance decrease of ODMG-api in CVS Date: Sun, 2 Nov 2003 18:31:49 +0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.4.2 References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <200311021831.49569.on@ukr.net> X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Hi Armin, I found the reason of the "performance decrease": I changed the ODMG test= on=20 2003/09/13, I added two lines marked by plus below: public void updateArticles(PerfArticle[] arr) throws Exception { m_tx.begin(); for (int i =3D 0; i < arr.length; i++) { m_tx.lock(arr[i], Transaction.WRITE); + arr[i].setArticleName("" + System.currentTimeMillis()); } m_tx.commit(); } public void updateArticlesStress(PerfArticle[] arr) throws Except= ion { for (int i =3D 0; i < arr.length; i++) { Transaction tx =3D odmg.newTransaction(); tx.begin(); tx.lock(arr[i], Transaction.WRITE); + arr[i].setArticleName("" + System.currentTimeMillis()); tx.commit(); } } Previously the update test didn't perform database UPDATE because objects= =20 remained unchanged, so comparison with other APIs where incorrect. After I added these lines to the OJBPerfTest.java in the CVS state as on August 1, the ODMG test took 30% longer then before. Regards, Oleg On Friday 03 October 2003 22:38, Armin Waibel wrote: > Hi all, > > some user reported about a ODMG-api performance > decrease of current CVS. I think they are right. > The performance test (perf-test task) for odmg-api > took 43 sec with rc4 (27 July) > took 37 sec with new DList implementation (1 August) > took 55 sec (ca. 25 Sep) > took 48 sec after fixing lock cleanup (today) > > So performance of odmg-api decrease more than > 30% between 08/01 and 09/25! > I couldn't find out the reason for that. Seems that > the changes made in odmg classes between this > period are minor. Maybe the reason are changes in > the kernel. But the kernel only performs ca. 5% > slower. > Any comments, proposals, solutions? > > regards, > Armin > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org