-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 454
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
asynchronous database performance analysis #1883
Comments
See #2137 :) |
As discussed today:
|
Work by @qstokkink This 2 weeks sprint contains operational multi-core Dispersy using Twisted. ThreadSafeExecute of Dispersy database access. Database requests become serialized. However, they can be requested from multiple Twisted threads! Tribler/dispersy@devel...qstokkink:threadeddb#diff-0d31758bc4ed14da7f82a5780aa66abdR38 Most of the speedup comes from a multi-core version of the Dispersy endpoint.py using Twisted: Tribler/dispersy@devel...qstokkink:threadeddb#diff-a694510bf8dca13af2bd89656ea772e0R210 |
@synctext the reason this approach works is that it does not return a database item from |
Update: |
Closed, as we should instead talk about particular databases, like Channels, or TC, etc. |
We now have blocking database IO. All database interaction is within the main twisted thread. It blocks, causing performance loss.
Events can be split in multiple parts. Events would continue when data has been retrieved, Twisted feature: https://twistedmatrix.com/documents/8.1.0/api/twisted.internet.defer.Deferred.html
Also, Lipu has an experimental branch using storm framework.
Task: benchmarking. Compare performance of various approaches, without full implementations (takes too much dev weeks).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: