Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-ignite-user-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-ignite-user-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9043E17EAC for ; Mon, 31 Aug 2015 21:15:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 47925 invoked by uid 500); 31 Aug 2015 21:15:50 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-ignite-user-archive@ignite.apache.org Received: (qmail 47889 invoked by uid 500); 31 Aug 2015 21:15:50 -0000 Mailing-List: contact user-help@ignite.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: user@ignite.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list user@ignite.apache.org Received: (qmail 47879 invoked by uid 99); 31 Aug 2015 21:15:50 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO spamd2-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 31 Aug 2015 21:15:50 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd2-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd2-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 1404B1AB2F4 for ; Mon, 31 Aug 2015 21:15:50 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd2-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 2.174 X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.174 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=1.2, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.972, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=disabled Received: from mx1-us-west.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd2-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.9]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jXI-Ir1g-shz for ; Mon, 31 Aug 2015 21:15:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mbob.nabble.com (mbob.nabble.com [162.253.133.15]) by mx1-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id C34FE20F19 for ; Mon, 31 Aug 2015 21:15:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from malf.nabble.com (unknown [162.253.133.59]) by mbob.nabble.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 142CE146EAE1 for ; Mon, 31 Aug 2015 14:12:39 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2015 14:09:23 -0700 (PDT) From: javadevmtl To: user@ignite.apache.org Message-ID: <1441055363214-1220.post@n6.nabble.com> Subject: Is invokeAll() considered a batch operation? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit So I have 27 keys to insert but using the same "business" logic... In the performance tips, it says to "reduce the number of jobs from 100 to 10". So instead of doing single invoke() per key I do invokeAll() for a list of keys once is that consider a performance improvement? -- View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Is-invokeAll-considered-a-batch-operation-tp1220.html Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.