directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kiran Ayyagari <kayyag...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [Mavibot Partition] Success
Date Sun, 01 Dec 2013 19:23:44 GMT
On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 12:48 AM, Emmanuel L├ęcharny <elecharny@gmail.com>wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
> finally, I got all the tests passing ! I found a big big bug in Mavibot
> delete operation, which was leaving the BTree in a bad state (ie, some
> entries suposely being deleted was still present). Once I fixed this bug
> (it was easy), I had all the server-integ and all the other tests
> passing fine.
>
> I'm now pretty sure that this bug was there for quite a long time,
> because I had random failures before while running tests, and had to run
> the tests more than once to get them running. The random failure was
> linked to the fact that we were using UUID to index the master table,
> and as UUID were randomly generated made it possible that the tests were
> passing from time to time.
>
> In the process, I was able to speed up the add operation by removing the
> useless drop/add operation on the rdnIndex, which speed up the addition
> by 10%.
>

All in all, we have now a server which run faster than with JDBM.
>
> perfect, thanks for the heads up

> Although we are not ready yet to get a release done. There are a few
> failures in Mavibot (in-memory partition browse operation is somehow
> broken due to some modifications I have done 2 weeks ago) and there are
> some tuning to do in the configuration to add some support for the cache
> used in Mavibot. Bt this is nothng really big.
>
> I'm confident now that we have something decent, even if we have many
> things to add to have an even faster server :
> - we should add some cache for indexes
> - we don't yet support revisions in Mavibot (currently, we have quite
> the same thing than JDBM)
> - the cache is not efficient (ehCache is a bug ball of things, we dont
> need all of it)
> - searches performance get very low when we don't have enough memory,
> and this has to be fixed (JDBM behaves better in such case)
>
> Those are quite important improvements and enhancements to add to the
> server, but I think that could be done in a 2.0-RC2.
>
> We are not far at all from a RC1 !
>

> --
> Regards,
> Cordialement,
> Emmanuel L├ęcharny
> www.iktek.com
>
>


-- 
Kiran Ayyagari
http://keydap.com

Mime
View raw message