directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "dave irving (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] Commented: (DIRMINA-119) Multiple selector loops
Date Thu, 01 Dec 2005 14:33:30 GMT
    [ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-119?page=comments#action_12359044 ] 

dave irving commented on DIRMINA-119:
-------------------------------------

Ok, code is nearly done - just writing the plumbing in SimpleServiceRegistry to hook it all
together now.

One small thing I'd like to discuss though....

Today, users create SocketConnectors directly (i.e, IoConnector connector = new SocketConnector()
).
However, we'll need some way to tell the SocketConnector what processor pool it is using (we
want it using the same one employed by the SimpleServiceRegistry's SocketAcceptor).

SimpleServiceRegistry is nice because it hides creational logic. Likewise, when configuring
with Spring integration there is also no issue.

However, for non spring configuration use cases, it would be nice if the user didn't have
to do anything themselves to get hooked up with the processing pool (its really an internal
implementation detail).

Any ideas? 



> Multiple selector loops
> -----------------------
>
>          Key: DIRMINA-119
>          URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-119
>      Project: Directory MINA
>         Type: Improvement
>     Versions: 0.8
>  Environment: All. Benefit is dependant on environment
>     Reporter: dave irving
>     Assignee: Trustin Lee
>     Priority: Minor
>      Fix For: 0.9
>  Attachments: prototype.zip
>
> Mina's SocketIoProcessor currently owns a Selector and employs a single Worker to run
the NIO "selector loop".
> I have been running tests where Im trying to maximise throughput and have found - that
in certain multi-cpu environments - this worker thread can encounter a large amount of starvation
even though CPU usage is fairly low.
> By testing 2 selector-loops instead of 1, I managed to improve my overall test throughput
by just under 30%.
> The general idea is to do this:
> - Each SocketIoProcessor.Worker encapsulates its own work queues associated Selector
> - It should be possible to configure the number of Workers (and thus selectors) employed
by SocketIoProcessor
> - When a SocketSession is added to the SocketIoProcessor, a Worker is selected (round-robin)
which will be associated with the SocketSession for its lifetime. This association is managed
by SocketSession (get/setWorker)
> - When someone asks SocketIoProcessor to do some work to a session, instead of doing
it directly, the processor now asks the session for its Worker, and delegates to the worker
(i.e, the same worker is always used for an individual session)
> I've done some prototyping, and have also checked that the concept works with the latest
build.
> The prototype is very hacky - mainly because there are some refactoring issues i'd like
feed-back on before I submit a "proper" patch for review. Namely:
> - How do you want me to tell the SocketIoProcessor how many workers to use? One option
is a system property - but thats pretty hacky. I dont think we need to support changing the
number of workers after operation has begun (It'll probably be a function of the number of
available CPUs) - and this makes the code simpler. However, as SocketIoProcessor is a (non
lazy created) singleton, we need a way to get the param in. We could refactor, or maybe introduce
a ProcessorOptions class or something. The SocketIoProcessor could interrigate this when initializing.
Any direction on your desired approach would be appreciated
> Cheers,
> Dave 

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
   http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see:
   http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira


Mime
View raw message