ignite-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Denis Magda <dma...@gridgain.com>
Subject Re: About Ignite Thin client performance
Date Wed, 13 Jun 2018 20:59:54 GMT
That statement is not generic as Pavel and Igor stated, and I surprised to
see that it ended up in our documentation. Removed it from there.

Sure, it's not a question that the thin client would be slower than a
standard one but that was an incorrect note.

--
Denis

On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 6:58 AM Igor Sapego <isapego@apache.org> wrote:

> +1 to Pavel
>
> "up to 50%" may mean 0.5% for your specific use case.
> Always measure your use case.
>
> Best Regards,
> Igor
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 4:29 PM Pavel Tupitsyn <ptupitsyn@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
>> Keep in mind that these performance numbers may be totally irrelevant for
>> your usage patterns and workloads.
>> 50% slowdown can occur in a very simple use case (like cache.get()) in
>> ideal conditions,
>> when there is nothing else but network transfer and deserialization.
>>
>> In real world use cases these network costs may become minuscule compared
>> to the real query and processing times.
>>
>> You should always measure your specific use case and decide.
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 11:20 AM, Mikael <mikael-aronsson@telia.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> It's in the documentation so why wouldn't it be true ? you have the same
>>> description at the beginning on how it works:
>>>
>>> "The thin client simply establishes a socket connection to a standard
>>> Ignite node‚Äč and performs all operations through that node."
>>>
>>> Mikael
>>>
>>> Den 2018-06-13 kl. 09:54, skrev Sambhaji Sawant:
>>>
>>> Thin client is up to 50% slower than Ignite client node
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>

Mime
View raw message