lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael McCandless <luc...@mikemccandless.com>
Subject Re: JDK 8 great performance increase on ByteBuffer read performance!?
Date Mon, 07 Apr 2014 16:54:57 GMT
In fact I just recently tested Java 8 GA vs Java 7 (I think 1.7 u25)
and I think there were small improvements, curiously especially to
span and sloppy phrase queries.

Since we mostly read big byte[] blocks I think gains to
ByteBuffer.getXXX won't help us that much.  But I'll retest, with 1.7
u60 and report back.

Mike McCandless

http://blog.mikemccandless.com


On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 11:59 AM, Uwe Schindler <uwe@thetaphi.de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On the Hotspot mailing list was the following post by Cleber Muramoto. It might be interesting
to check MMapDirectory in Java 8!
>  Mike, do you maybe setup another luceneutil test on Lucene on Beast with JDK 8 GA? Can
we do a comparison between JDK 7u60 and JDK 8 GA? It would be very interesting, because one
reason some people want to have the native mmap variants because of the additional slowdown
caused by the ByteBuffer wrapping.
>
> Uwe
>
> === snip ===
> Hello, I'm curious to know if there has been any low-level optmizations regarding direct
buffers getXXX methods on JDK8 and, if they're planned to be integrated in JDK7, if applicable.
I googled and took a look at the bug database but I couldn't find anything related.
>
> I have a microbenchmark that does millions of iterations serializing and deserializing
objects to/from ByteBuffers and I noticed that read performance on JDK 8 has increased by
almost 45% in comparison to earliear JDK 7 releases in the serial case and more than 200%
on the concurrent case! I think that the concurrent test is perhaps benefiniting from newer
ForkJoinPool/concurrency code, but the difference in the serial case is still very large!
>
> Bellow are the VM arguments that I'm using for the test:
>
> $JAVA -server -XX:+UseParallelGC \
> -XX:+UseLargePages -XX:MaxDirectMemorySize=10G -Xmx1g -XX:MaxInlineSize=256 \ -XX:+UnlockDiagnosticVMOptions
-XX:+PrintInlining -XX:+LogCompilation
>
> JDK8 seems to generate much more compiling information than the previous versions, but
I wasn't able to find any indicators for such huge performance difference.
>
> Here are the test results (collected with the diagnostic flags off, on a HP
> G7 48 CPU box).
>
> Concurrent Reads:
>
> 503K   Reads/s|Writes/s 161K (jdk7U10)
> 940K   Reads/s|Writes/s 165K (jdk7U40)
> 956K   Reads/s|Writes/s 159K (jdk7U60 EA)
> 1644K Reads/s|Writes/s 172K (jdk8-more than 3x faster than U10!)
>
> Serial Reads:
>
> 137K Reads/s|Writes/s 146K
> 145K Reads/s|Writes/s 145K
> 143K Reads/s|Writes/s 155K
> 198K Reads/s|Writes/s 172K
>
> Upon deserialization the test does a lot of short-lived allocations, but GC reports show
very similar results for every JDK versions used in the test (about ~500 Young Gen Collections
and ~1800ms spent by PS Scavenge).
>
> Anyway, great work!!! I hope I can migrate to JDK8 as soon as possible.
>
> Regards
>
> Cleber
>
> -----
> Uwe Schindler
> H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
> http://www.thetaphi.de
> eMail: uwe@thetaphi.de
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org


Mime
View raw message