jackrabbit-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Sridhar Raman" <sridhar.ra...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Performance of save operation dependent on size of parent node?
Date Thu, 09 Oct 2008 06:45:55 GMT
Another thing.  These times were observed while doing an import into the
repository.

On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 11:49 AM, Sridhar Raman <sridhar.raman@gmail.com>wrote:

> My persistence manager is bundle.DerbyPersistenceManager.
> The node that is getting versioned would typically have around 20
> properties, out of which 12 or so woule be multi-value.
>
> I shall attach the test-case soon.
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 6:32 PM, Stefan Guggisberg <
> stefan.guggisberg@day.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 11:31 AM, Sridhar Raman <sridhar.raman@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > I have a parent node which, initially, has 0 children nodes.  Now I add
>> 1000
>> > nodes, and perform a save.  I keep repeating this task.  Should the
>> > performance of parent_node.save() deteriorate as the size of the parent
>> node
>> > increases?  That's what I am observing, despite the fact that the
>> absolute
>> > count of the number of nodes being saved is the same each time - 1000.
>>  Is
>> > this expected behaviour?
>> >
>> > Also, if the node that is getting saved is versionable, then the
>> performance
>> > deterioration is much worse.
>> >
>> > Some rough numbers-
>> > Without versioning:
>> > 1000 takes 10 seconds
>> > 3000 takes 13 seconds
>> > ...
>> > 10000 takes 20 seconds
>> > ...
>> > 20000 takes 21 seconds
>> >
>> > With versioning:
>> > 1000 takes 24 seconds
>> > 3000 takes 26 seconds
>> > ...
>> > 10000 takes 40 seconds
>> > ...
>> > 20000 takes 118 seconds
>> >
>> > I can still live with the numbers that occur with no versioning.  But,
>> with
>> > versioning, it could be a problem.
>>
>> versioning does come at a price, i.e. it significantly impacts
>> performance.
>>
>> however, your figures seem way to slow. please provide details about your
>> configuration (repository.xml, deployment model) and ideally a simple,
>> self-contained test case. i'd be happy to further investigate your
>> problem.
>>
>> cheers
>> stefan
>>
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Sridhar
>> >
>>
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message