Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-jackrabbit-oak-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-jackrabbit-oak-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 63DBAECE6 for ; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 10:23:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 69515 invoked by uid 500); 26 Feb 2013 10:23:07 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-jackrabbit-oak-dev-archive@jackrabbit.apache.org Received: (qmail 69483 invoked by uid 500); 26 Feb 2013 10:23:07 -0000 Mailing-List: contact oak-dev-help@jackrabbit.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: oak-dev@jackrabbit.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list oak-dev@jackrabbit.apache.org Received: (qmail 69263 invoked by uid 99); 26 Feb 2013 10:23:06 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 10:23:06 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=FRT_ADOBE2,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of teofili@adobe.com designates 64.18.1.191 as permitted sender) Received: from [64.18.1.191] (HELO exprod6og106.obsmtp.com) (64.18.1.191) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 10:22:57 +0000 Received: from outbound-smtp-1.corp.adobe.com ([192.150.11.134]) by exprod6ob106.postini.com ([64.18.5.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKUSyM7eTz458obW2xq3hUY68vmSvWhFU8@postini.com; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 02:22:37 PST Received: from inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com ([153.32.1.51]) by outbound-smtp-1.corp.adobe.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id r1QAJX1v026457 for ; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 02:19:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from nahub01.corp.adobe.com (nahub01.corp.adobe.com [10.8.189.97]) by inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id r1QAMaAV006712 for ; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 02:22:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from eurhub01.eur.adobe.com (10.128.4.30) by nahub01.corp.adobe.com (10.8.189.97) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.298.1; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 02:22:36 -0800 Received: from eurmbx02.eur.adobe.com ([10.128.4.126]) by eurhub01.eur.adobe.com ([10.128.4.30]) with mapi; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 10:22:35 +0000 From: Tommaso Teofili To: "oak-dev@jackrabbit.apache.org" Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 10:22:28 +0000 Subject: Re: Large flat commit problems Thread-Topic: Large flat commit problems Thread-Index: Ac4UCzCel+Fu/eQlSOShLqw42w/Jig== Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On 26/feb/2013, at 11:12, Jukka Zitting wrote: > Hi, >=20 > On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 12:04 PM, Thomas Mueller wrot= e: >> Large transactions: I think we didn't define this as a strict requiremen= t. >=20 > It's probably not the most important thing for Oak to achieve, but we > did list it as a goal in > http://wiki.apache.org/jackrabbit/Goals%20and%20non%20goals%20for%20Jackr= abbit%203: >=20 > * Big transactions (> 100k nodes at 1kB each) I agree it's important, especially for future evaluation of Oak by newcomer= s these are common metrics. >=20 >> I didn't analyze the results, but could the problem be orderable child >> nodes? >=20 > That may well be, in the benchmark code I don't explicitly specify a > non-orderable node type so it defaults to the orderable > nt:unstructured. since the slowing trend is common, even if different, between the MK implem= entations maybe it's something also related to data structures holding stuf= f in memory. In my opinion it'd be good to inspect further in order to catch this sort o= f things as earliest as possible. Tommaso >=20 > BR, >=20 > Jukka Zitting