From dev-return-355051-archive-asf-public=cust-asf.ponee.io@lucene.apache.org Mon May 6 17:57:03 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [207.244.88.153]) by mx-eu-01.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id 3EF5618060F for ; Mon, 6 May 2019 19:57:03 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 11313 invoked by uid 500); 6 May 2019 17:57:01 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 11296 invoked by uid 99); 6 May 2019 17:57:01 -0000 Received: from mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org (HELO mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.139) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 06 May 2019 17:57:01 +0000 Received: from jira-lw-us.apache.org (unknown [207.244.88.139]) by mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id A0B82E2B4A for ; Mon, 6 May 2019 17:57:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from jira-lw-us.apache.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by jira-lw-us.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at jira-lw-us.apache.org) with ESMTP id 601A625814 for ; Mon, 6 May 2019 17:57:00 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 6 May 2019 17:57:00 +0000 (UTC) From: "Atri Sharma (JIRA)" To: dev@lucene.apache.org Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Subject: [jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-8757) Better Segment To Thread Mapping Algorithm MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-JIRA-FingerPrint: 30527f35849b9dde25b450d4833f0394 [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8757?page=3Dcom.atlassia= n.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=3D168= 34065#comment-16834065 ]=20 Atri Sharma commented on LUCENE-8757: ------------------------------------- Hi [~simonw], =C2=A0 Spending a bit more time thinking about your suggestions, I agree that it i= s a great idea, albeit requiring more thought and effort than what this=C2= =A0Jira proposes to achieve. I have opened=C2=A0LUCENE-8794 - Cost Based Slice Allocation Algorithm=C2= =A0for discussing the same. Please share your thoughts. =C2=A0 Would it make sense to push this patch, and then let users consume it and p= rovide feedback while we iterate on the more sophisticated version? We coul= d even have both of the methods available as options to users, potentially =C2=A0 Thoughts? =C2=A0 > Better Segment To Thread Mapping Algorithm > ------------------------------------------ > > Key: LUCENE-8757 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8757 > Project: Lucene - Core > Issue Type: Improvement > Reporter: Atri Sharma > Priority: Major > Attachments: LUCENE-8757.patch > > > The current segments to threads allocation algorithm always=C2=A0allocate= s one thread per segment. This is detrimental to performance in case of ske= w in segment sizes since small segments also get their dedicated thread. Th= is can lead to performance degradation due to context switching overheads. > =C2=A0 > A better algorithm which is cognizant of size skew would have better perf= ormance for realistic scenarios -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org