river-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From MICHAEL MCGRADY <mmcgr...@topiatechnology.com>
Subject Re: Space/outrigger suggestions (remote iterator vs. collection)
Date Wed, 22 Dec 2010 19:25:06 GMT
One sort of test would be to see where the weaknesses are and try to break it at the weakest
point.  

MG


On Dec 22, 2010, at 11:08 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote:

> On 12/22/2010 10:57 AM, jgrahn@simulexinc.com wrote:
> ...
>> This is the biggest concern, I think.   As such, I'd be interested in
>> seeing performance runs, to back up the intuition.   Then, at least,
>> we'd know precisely what trade-off we're talking about.
>> 
>> The test would need to cover both small batches and large, both in
>> multiples of the batch-size/takeMultipleLimit and for numbers off of
>> those multiples, with transactions and without.
> 
> I think we need a lot of performance tests, some way to organize them, and some way to
retain their results.
> 
> I propose adding a "performance" folder to the River trunk, with subdirectories "src"
and "results". src would contain benchmark source code. result would contain benchmark output.
> 
> System level tests could have their own package hierarchy, under org.apache.impl, but
reflecting what is being measured. Unit level tests would need to follow the package hierarchy
for the code being tested, to get package access. The results hierarchy would mirror that
src hierarchy for the tests.
> 
> Any ideas, alternatives, changes, improvements?
> 
> Patricia

Michael McGrady
Chief Architect
Topia Technology, Inc.
Cel 1.253.720.3365
Work 1.253.572.9712 extension 2037
mmcgrady@topiatechnology.com




Mime
View raw message