lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Paul Cowan (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] Updated: (LUCENE-806) Synchronization bottleneck in FieldSortedHitQueue with many concurrent readers
Date Tue, 03 Apr 2007 07:43:32 GMT


Paul Cowan updated LUCENE-806:

    Attachment: LUCENE-806-minimal-publicapi.patch

Minimal ThreadLocal wrapper, Implementation #3: public static API. This is the easiest way
to do this, but means that if it's later refactored to be unnecessary (or, more accurately,
be done in a cleaner way) the API may get yanked after only a relatively short lifespan.

> Synchronization bottleneck in FieldSortedHitQueue with many concurrent readers
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: LUCENE-806
>                 URL:
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Search
>    Affects Versions: 2.0.0
>            Reporter: Paul Cowan
>            Priority: Minor
>         Attachments: LUCENE-806-minimal-publicapi.patch, LUCENE-806-minimal-systemproperty.patch,
LUCENE-806-minimal-usealways.patch, lucene-806-proposed-direction.patch, lucene-806.patch
> The below is from a post by (my colleague) Paul Smith to the java-users list:
> ---
> Hi ho peoples.
> We have an application that is internationalized, and stores data from many languages
(each project has it's own index, mostly aligned with a single language, maybe 2).
> Anyway, I've noticed during some thread dumps diagnosing some performance issues, that
there appears to be a _potential_ synchronization bottleneck using Locale-based sorting of
Strings.  I don't think this problem is the root cause of our performance problem, but I thought
I'd mention it here.  Here's the stack dump of a thread waiting:
> "http-1001-Processor245" daemon prio=1 tid=0x31434da0 nid=0x3744 waiting for monitor
entry [0x2cd44000..0x2cd45f30]
>         at
>         - waiting to lock <0x6b1e8c68> (a java.text.RuleBasedCollator)
>         at$
>         at
>         at org.apache.lucene.util.PriorityQueue.upHeap(
>         at org.apache.lucene.util.PriorityQueue.put(
>         at org.apache.lucene.util.PriorityQueue.insert(
>         at
>         at
>         at
>         at
>         at
>         at
>         at
> .....
> In our case we had 12 threads waiting like this, while one thread had the lock on the
RuleBasedCollator.  Turns out RuleBasedCollator' method is synchronized.  I
wonder if a ThreadLocal based collator would be better here... ?  There doesn't appear to
be a reason for other threads searching the same index to wait on this sort.  Be just as easy
to use their own.  (Is RuleBasedCollator a "heavy" object memory wise?  Wouldn't have thought
so, per thread)
> Thoughts?
> ---
> I've investigated this somewhat, and agree that this is a potential problem with a series
of possible workarounds. Further discussion (including proof-of-concept patch) to follow.

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message