Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
NEW: Monitor These Apps!
elasticsearch, apache solr, apache hbase, hadoop, redis, casssandra, amazon cloudwatch, mysql, memcached, apache kafka, apache zookeeper, apache storm, ubuntu, centOS, red hat, debian, puppet labs, java, senseiDB
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Threaded View
Zookeeper >> mail # user >> sync vs. async vs. multi performances


Copy link to this message
-
Re: sync vs. async vs. multi performances
Yes it is possible.

With a loaded server, each group of transactions wiill take about one
rotation.  But the time from when they arrived to the time that they are
committed will be roughly 0 ... 8 ms for a 7200 RPM drive because the
transactions will be arriving at different times.

There will be overheads which make this untrue, but the basic idea that you
don't necessarily have to wait for a full rotation if you arrive partway
through a rotation is correct.

On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 6:18 PM, Ariel Weisberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:

> ...
> I used (http://pastebin.com/uu7igM3J) and the results for 4k writes were
> http://pastebin.com/N26CJtQE. 8.5 milliseconds, which is a bit slower than
> 5. Is it possible to beat the rotation speed?
>
>
NEW: Monitor These Apps!
elasticsearch, apache solr, apache hbase, hadoop, redis, casssandra, amazon cloudwatch, mysql, memcached, apache kafka, apache zookeeper, apache storm, ubuntu, centOS, red hat, debian, puppet labs, java, senseiDB