Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-directmemory-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-directmemory-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id EB8A0D121 for ; Sat, 10 Nov 2012 15:37:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 45098 invoked by uid 500); 10 Nov 2012 15:37:06 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-directmemory-dev-archive@directmemory.apache.org Received: (qmail 44969 invoked by uid 500); 10 Nov 2012 15:37:03 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@directmemory.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@directmemory.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@directmemory.apache.org Received: (qmail 44925 invoked by uid 99); 10 Nov 2012 15:37:02 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 10 Nov 2012 15:37:02 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of jvermillard@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.50 as permitted sender) Received: from [74.125.82.50] (HELO mail-wg0-f50.google.com) (74.125.82.50) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 10 Nov 2012 15:36:55 +0000 Received: by mail-wg0-f50.google.com with SMTP id 16so3400388wgi.19 for ; Sat, 10 Nov 2012 07:36:34 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; bh=2/iZuq/qlMg97xft5zrx9qK4T4/o7a+8Yw+PbmUcuuU=; b=Rw+qwRRiNW/SyXEwrsauObbVakGl4inFBvikJ2L6GsvF911ekGSkktj2CyKO0YAuPY WkZh5fLKZEoJE8vnyTHFleVwIIi/PEwapV+avUILq7dJ/Yr+G5bsPxMicrDirig7uHvN QAeZHAJv/lv9wD3mmF4BIAIJoPTSEDegQREQ19k4iU9m540UQu/Lg2g/Xlc+ZXmr12Ez MtJx0p0rDyxLh7ZhbkltWtmRixA8M70JoX0P33+I9QsWSMwS9plQbBAL0Emgr+qI+z8R NQ7UUTUQ6HLoZU4LyuTWxclmoujqd4WJBgzMDZfhr46IX1wqhlqcQnOyFuiMnWVrGFg7 hqzQ== Received: by 10.180.97.72 with SMTP id dy8mr7606311wib.6.1352561794816; Sat, 10 Nov 2012 07:36:34 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.180.8.36 with HTTP; Sat, 10 Nov 2012 07:36:13 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <5099AE92.5060808@gmail.com> From: Julien Vermillard Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2012 16:36:13 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: MapDB To: dev@directmemory.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d044306705119da04ce25d558 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --f46d044306705119da04ce25d558 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi, just a small comment. As mapDB use memory mapped files (mmap) using it for offloading memory to disk is probably not a performing idea since the O/S will already cache the file in memory the file for you : https://www.varnish-cache.org/trac/wiki/ArchitectNotes You will basicly have two memoery cache and the O/S will beat the directmemory one. My 2 cents, Julien On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:54 AM, Raffaele P. Guidi < raffaele.p.guidi@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi and thanks for your interest and offer! I know and appreciate your > project and made plans to integrate it as disk store since the early days. > We sure need good serialization libraries, in fact, in addition to provide > support for many different ones (kryo, msgpack, protostuff, etc) we > recently welcomed lightning (an unsafe based serializer by Christophe > Engelbert) as a subproject to complement our codebase with a fast (and > in-house) choice. > > I think we have more than one reason to integrate and share code: > > > 1. DirectMemory could make good use of mapdb to serialize least > frequently used items to disk and free memory > 2. DirectMemory could implement a MapDB disk based store in addition to > the bytebuffer and unsafe ones > 3. MapDB could take advantage of DM's componentization approach to > support multiple serializers (we believe each one has its advantages in > different scenarios) > 4. MapDB could use DM to write items to an off-heap before writing to > disk (asynchronously) to improve speed > 5. We could merge our serialization efforts (I believe lightning is very > fast and worth to be considered) and provide an even better solution or > two > alternative implementations > > In both cases we would be open to contribution in different forms - just > contributing patches or with you to join us and the ASF as module or > subproject (the latter options have to undergo a formal vote by all project > members, of course) as I strongly believe that merging efforts would bring > to a better and more complete product. > > What do you think about it? > > Regards, > Raffaele > --f46d044306705119da04ce25d558--