Mailing-List: contact oak-dev-help@jackrabbit.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: oak-dev@jackrabbit.apache.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAB+dfikvp1ider8n6BwsactHQfzmwEk2x2Mw90ahLnKMr9up7g@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAB+dfimU8H4XiT-cD7_udwMFsftixabAvdH3zDCi+Ymk6o8JiA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CE9D2951.C2D7%anchela@adobe.com>
	<CAB+dfikvp1ider8n6BwsactHQfzmwEk2x2Mw90ahLnKMr9up7g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2013 22:40:51 -0800
Message-ID: 
 <CAB+dfi=Ac7LJWvFyrE_4V31k475jgciijm_mqUS1gcJZuxPiVQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [oak] ACL cache performance
From: Tobias Bocanegra <tripod@apache.org>
To: "oak-dev@jackrabbit.apache.org" <oak-dev@jackrabbit.apache.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e01536bde51f71204ea6850fb

--089e01536bde51f71204ea6850fb
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Hi,

I made some minor changes to cache handling, so that it only caches the
everyone's entries. I also optimized the entry iterator slightly, so that
it's even more lazy. together with the improvements of jukka the micro
benchmarks look really good, at least for the ManyUserReadTest. If we also
get rid of the SecurityContext, I expect even further improvements.

Regards, Toby

Benchmarks: ManyUserReadTest
Fixtures: Oak-Tar Jackrabbit
Runtime: 10
Num Items: 10000
Concurrency: 1,2,4,8,10,15,20,50
Random User: true
Profiling: false
--------------------------------------
Executing benchmarks as admin: false on Oak-Tar
-----------------------------------------------------------
# ManyUserReadTest          ,      C,    min,    10%,    50%,    90%,
 max,      N
Oak-Tar                     ,      1,    292,    302,    308,    316,
 326,     33
Oak-Tar                     ,      2,    322,    335,    343,    357,
 365,     60
Oak-Tar                     ,      4,    416,    453,    474,    501,
 515,     87
Oak-Tar                     ,      8,    699,    717,    746,    770,
 800,    112
Oak-Tar                     ,     10,    790,    889,    940,    991,
1027,    110
Oak-Tar                     ,     15,    711,   1315,   1428,   1518,
1590,    111
Oak-Tar                     ,     20,   1430,   1603,   1919,   2090,
2240,    117
Oak-Tar                     ,     50,   2519,   2997,   4640,   5632,
6626,    127
Executing benchmarks as admin: false on Jackrabbit
-----------------------------------------------------------
# ManyUserReadTest          ,      C,    min,    10%,    50%,    90%,
 max,      N
Jackrabbit                  ,      1,    328,    338,    347,    383,
 705,     28
Jackrabbit                  ,      2,    399,    404,    432,    647,
 856,     44
Jackrabbit                  ,      4,    528,    539,    565,    959,
 979,     64
Jackrabbit                  ,      8,   1106,   1130,   1166,   1514,
1554,     72
Jackrabbit                  ,     10,   1368,   1399,   1467,   1833,
1886,     70
Jackrabbit                  ,     15,   2016,   2137,   2259,   2617,
2710,     75
Jackrabbit                  ,     20,   1496,   1562,   3357,   3595,
3729,     70
Jackrabbit                  ,     50,   8222,   8563,   8814,   9022,
9416,    100
Executing benchmarks as admin: true on Oak-Tar
-----------------------------------------------------------
# ManyUserReadTest          ,      C,    min,    10%,    50%,    90%,
 max,      N
Oak-Tar                     ,      1,    127,    128,    132,    136,
 140,     76
Oak-Tar                     ,      2,    144,    148,    155,    160,
 165,    130
Oak-Tar                     ,      4,    188,    206,    217,    227,
 243,    186
Oak-Tar                     ,      8,    314,    343,    355,    367,
 395,    231
Oak-Tar                     ,     10,    289,    432,    462,    498,
 534,    220
Oak-Tar                     ,     15,    386,    624,    703,    785,
 868,    219
Oak-Tar                     ,     20,    535,    832,    948,   1125,
1357,    215
Oak-Tar                     ,     50,   1372,   1810,   2415,   3013,
3692,    223
Executing benchmarks as admin: true on Jackrabbit
-----------------------------------------------------------
# ManyUserReadTest          ,      C,    min,    10%,    50%,    90%,
 max,      N
Jackrabbit                  ,      1,    245,    247,    259,    300,
 630,     37
Jackrabbit                  ,      2,    296,    301,    310,    360,
 631,     60
Jackrabbit                  ,      4,    413,    428,    474,    711,
 762,     80
Jackrabbit                  ,      8,    465,    783,    872,   1137,
1200,     89
Jackrabbit                  ,     10,    927,    981,   1114,   1494,
1599,     92
Jackrabbit                  ,     15,   1328,   1446,   1710,   2210,
2681,     90
Jackrabbit                  ,     20,    914,   1787,   2327,   3238,
3425,     88
Jackrabbit                  ,     50,   1305,   1691,  10351,  10852,
 11269,     61


On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 2:01 AM, Tobias Bocanegra <tripod@apache.org> wrote:

>
>
> On Monday, November 4, 2013, Angela Schreiber wrote:
>
>> hi
>>
>> thanks for the figures and the effort. btw... this discussion
>> belong oak dev list and not to the adobe internal list -> moving.
>>
>> if the global cache doesn't add to much to the performance gain
>> then i would suggest that we drop it immediately...
>
>
> sure, I'll look at it again.
>
>
>> in jackrabbit the
>> caching on a global level was the most troublesome part of the
>> whole permission evaluation and i would definitely want to
>> avoid running into the same issues again.
>>
>> i would suggest to change this to an 'everyone' only cache as i
>> proposed it earlier to you in a private discussion which also
>> included a first draft of such an everyone-cache.
>
>
> yes. although it should be a general cache that looks at the principals
> that have a lot permission entries. this might be the everyone, but can
> also be other ones.
>
> regards Toby
>
>>
>> regards
>> angela
>>
>> On 11/1/13 8:43 AM, "Tobias Bocanegra" <tripod@adobe.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Hi,
>> >
>> >I quickly tested the ACL performance again using the ManyUserReadTest.
>> >The tests consists of reading 10k items from a 120k item repository
>> >which has an ACL set on every 10th node. Each tests uses a different
>> >user (1 of 1000) which each is member of 10 groups.
>> >
>> >if my tests are accurate, oak shows now the same performance as
>> >jackrabbit. for admin sessions, it's even faster than jackrabbit. I
>> >find it still not acceptable, that the non-admin case is 3 times
>> >slower than the admin case.
>> >
>> >it's also of significance, that the global cache does not really gain
>> >much performance for this test. see the last section of numbers. I
>> >think that the global ACL cache is only beneficial for some
>> >principals, like "everyone" that are used for every request. and/or
>> >only really makes a difference, if the overall ACL evaluation overhead
>> >is reduced.
>> >
>> >Regards, Toby
>> >
>> >Executing benchmarks as admin: false on Oak-Tar
>> >-----------------------------------------------------------
>> ># ManyUserReadTest          ,      C,    min,    10%,    50%,    90%,
>> >  max,      N
>> >Oak-Tar                     ,      1,    565,    578,    600,    615,
>> >  627,     34
>> >Oak-Tar                     ,      2,    653,    681,    715,    761,
>> >  798,     56
>> >Oak-Tar                     ,      4,    822,    989,   1053,   1101,
>> > 1126,     78
>> >Oak-Tar                     ,      8,   1509,   1626,   1722,   1798,
>> > 1893,     96
>> >Oak-Tar                     ,     10,   1905,   2041,   2175,   2298,
>> > 2375,    100
>> >Oak-Tar                     ,     15,   2545,   2850,   3201,   3484,
>> > 3663,    103
>> >Oak-Tar                     ,     20,   3519,   3852,   4254,   4737,
>> > 5251,    100
>> >Oak-Tar                     ,     50,   2666,   9504,  10450,  11440,
>> >13050,    104
>> >Executing benchmarks as admin: false on Jackrabbit
>> >-----------------------------------------------------------
>> ># ManyUserReadTest          ,      C,    min,    10%,    50%,    90%,
>> >  max,      N
>> >Jackrabbit                  ,      1,    455,    495,    539,    625,
>> > 1148,     36
>> >Jackrabbit                  ,      2,    507,    512,    575,    841,
>> > 1264,     62
>> >Jackrabbit                  ,      4,    768,    789,    861,   1220,
>> > 1266,     88
>> >Jackrabbit                  ,      8,   1416,   1516,   1624,   1999,
>> > 2038,     96
>> >Jackrabbit                  ,     10,   1764,   1812,   2074,   2796,
>> > 2859,     90
>> >Jackrabbit                  ,     15,   3030,   3077,   3611,   3841,
>> > 3950,     90
>> >Jackrabbit                  ,     20,   4495,   4683,   4874,   5031,
>> > 5121,    100
>> >Jackrabbit                  ,     50,  12219,  12546,  12827,  13232,
>>
>

--089e01536bde51f71204ea6850fb--