Return-Path: 
 <dev-return-1931-apmail-cassandra-dev-archive=cassandra.apache.org@cassandra.apache.org>
Delivered-To: apmail-cassandra-dev-archive@www.apache.org
Received: (qmail 57816 invoked from network); 19 Apr 2010 21:46:29 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3)
  by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 19 Apr 2010 21:46:29 -0000
Received: (qmail 37430 invoked by uid 500); 19 Apr 2010 21:46:28 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-cassandra-dev-archive@cassandra.apache.org
Received: (qmail 36843 invoked by uid 500); 19 Apr 2010 21:46:28 -0000
Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cassandra.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:dev-help@cassandra.apache.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:dev-unsubscribe@cassandra.apache.org>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@cassandra.apache.org>
List-Id: <dev.cassandra.apache.org>
Reply-To: dev@cassandra.apache.org
Delivered-To: mailing list dev@cassandra.apache.org
Received: (qmail 36543 invoked by uid 99); 19 Apr 2010 21:46:27 -0000
Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 19 Apr 2010 21:46:27 +0000
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.2 required=10.0
	tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of masoodmortazavi@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.222.190 as permitted sender)
Received: from [209.85.222.190] (HELO mail-pz0-f190.google.com)
 (209.85.222.190)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 19 Apr 2010 21:46:22 +0000
Received: by pzk28 with SMTP id 28so3882611pzk.11
        for <multiple recipients>; Mon, 19 Apr 2010 14:46:00 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references
         :date:received:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type;
        bh=zdh3pRds/27Y3qsvcwOllo15jXCplSW7hQyiPmoTmBM=;
        b=EqQzmZ+7jXgZEquhD6VR2dcILXxzylkuitdJpaz+9/8n4GuPoOkYi2xNe5B/+K50z3
         zyPhIatC2eemk7Awq+3NRnhU/VGUbZStpqQUox3uk+M6oFkU21xM/JPltbHY4BZhBJsC
         JjbofjiOGrwgTuymUD1VS3wLOYIQvfXn/9Gh0=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :cc:content-type;
        b=fIjVHNhlBKQLtTgqWiVhQrkoToOvxS4e9ofqUoy5GNInxcS1wXX7iBAfg5QMr0+Jbn
         ap4w1F+lbnOzFvxohF/usPPSIyzv48xD+rduPPQdnKdp8zHEpnwjbUOD68pC2etiimE7
         G6/DvLq4oDDjjBjIH/OcfAyHjXkUZ+g8XVkZQ=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.140.136.7 with HTTP; Mon, 19 Apr 2010 14:46:00 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: 
 <33FDEB0CE2F65F41A4CF8769247BB3668DC5DAA602@EXVMBX016-3.exch016.msoutlookonline.net>
References: <i2ib3e0f7631004190414xf1e8b76g8cb16db029c1121e@mail.gmail.com>
	 <33FDEB0CE2F65F41A4CF8769247BB3668DC5DAA602@EXVMBX016-3.exch016.msoutlookonline.net>
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2010 14:46:00 -0700
Received: by 10.141.107.2 with SMTP id j2mr2181824rvm.200.1271713560321; Mon,
	19 Apr 2010 14:46:00 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <v2ub3e0f7631004191446nd96cd20es6124c8c95fc51b0f@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: 0.6 insert performance .... Re: [RELEASE] 0.6.1
From: Masood Mortazavi <masoodmortazavi@gmail.com>
To: user@cassandra.apache.org
Cc: "dev@cassandra.apache.org" <dev@cassandra.apache.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=000e0cd13a3e04dff204849de3ee
X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org

--000e0cd13a3e04dff204849de3ee
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Minimizing GC pauses or minimizing time slots allocated to GC pauses --
either through configuration or re-implementations of garbage collection
"bottlenecks" (i.e. object-generation "bottlenecks") -- seem to be the
immediate approach. (Other approaches appear to be more intrusive.)
At code level, using the GC logs, one can investigate further. There may be
places were some object recycling can make some larger difference.
Trying this first will probably bear more immediate fruit.

- m.

On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 9:11 AM, Daniel Kluesing <dk@bluekai.com> wrote:

>  We see this behavior as well with 0.6, heap usage graphs look almost
> identical. The GC is a noticeable bottleneck, we=92ve tried jdku19 and jr=
ockit
> vm=92s. It basically kills any kind of soft real time behavior.
>
>
>
> *From:* Masood Mortazavi [mailto:masoodmortazavi@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Monday, April 19, 2010 4:15 AM
> *To:* user@cassandra.apache.org; dev@cassandra.apache.org
> *Subject:* 0.6 insert performance .... Re: [RELEASE] 0.6.1
>
>
>
> I wonder if anyone can use:
>
>  * Add logging of GC activity (CASSANDRA-813)
> to confirm this:
>   http://www.slideshare.net/schubertzhang/cassandra-060-insert-throughput
>
> - m.
>
>  On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 6:58 PM, Eric Evans <eevans@rackspace.com> wrote=
:
>
>
> Hot on the trails of 0.6.0 comes our latest, 0.6.1. This stable point
> release contains a number of important bugfixes[1] and is a painless
> upgrade from 0.6.0.
>
> Enjoy!
>
> [1]: http://bit.ly/9NqwAb (changelog)
>
> --
> Eric Evans
> eevans@rackspace.com
>
>
>

--000e0cd13a3e04dff204849de3ee--