ignite-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "swy (Jira)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (IGNITE-12374) Too low performance ~200TPS for single ODBC client
Date Wed, 20 Nov 2019 12:11:00 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12374?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16978358#comment-16978358

swy commented on IGNITE-12374:

Thank you [~isapego], also I have doubt if we should rebind everytime a new value assigned
to query, or instead reserve memory and copy the new value to the reserve. The later is what
the application doing but is this a right thing to do?

> Too low performance ~200TPS for single ODBC client
> --------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: IGNITE-12374
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12374
>             Project: Ignite
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: clients, odbc
>    Affects Versions: 2.7.5
>         Environment: Ignite server run on top of Kubernetes, with 2 server nodes, persistence
enabled. Both CPU and RAM at server/client server is sufficient according to system reports.
>            Reporter: swy
>            Priority: Major
>         Attachments: odbcsample.cc, values.yaml
> Hi, in our test ignite performance with ODBC connection is too bad to proceed with product
integration. It is about ~200 TPS, each transaction with select+update operation.
> Please refer to attach sample program. It is just a simple test case. 
> Based on the profiling most of the time consumed by sql execution. Please advice if the
application did not do the right thing.
> Thank you.
> g++ -I/usr/include -I./ignite/binary/include -I./ignite/common/include -I./ignite/common/os/linux/include
-I./ignite/common/os/win/include -I./ignite/core/include -I./ignite/jni/include odbcsample.cc
-o odbcsample -lodbc -L./ignite-libs/libignite.so -L./ignite-libs/libignite-odbc.so

This message was sent by Atlassian Jira

View raw message