Does anyone have an issue with merging https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/3220 to the 1.9.0 release branch?
It fixes a race condition introduced by the fix to GEODE-6424 that was approved above. It is critical that we keep the fix to GEODE-6424 in 1.9.0 in order to be able to proceed with benchmarking Geode, so we should also merge this fix to avoid issues with concurrent access and modification of gauge statistics. ~Helena On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 3:58 PM Jacob Barrett <jbarr...@pivotal.io> wrote: > My bad! Sorry! > > > On Feb 20, 2019, at 3:22 PM, Sai Boorlagadda <sai.boorlaga...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > Jake, > > > > release branch build seems broken due to spotless changes. > > > > > https://concourse.apachegeode-ci.info/teams/main/pipelines/apache-release-1-9-0-main > > > > Sai > > > >> On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 2:59 PM Jacob Barrett <jbarr...@pivotal.io> > wrote: > >> > >> Done! > >> > >>> On Feb 20, 2019, at 1:22 PM, Udo Kohlmeyer <u...@apache.org> wrote: > >>> > >>> +1, Go,Go,GO!! > >>> > >>>> On 2/20/19 12:24, Jacob Barrett wrote: > >>>> Anyone have issue with merging > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-6424 < > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-6424> into release/1.9.0? > >>>> > >>>> Without it we will have to wait for the next release before we can > have > >> meaningful baselines for function and query benchmarks. Without this fix > >> baselines will continue to vary by as much as 45% making them useless. > >>>> > >>>> It’s also a big performance boost. Concurrent local cache gets see > >> about a 50% bump in throughput due to reduced contention for stats, even > >> with timed stats enabled. Other operations haven’t been benchmarked but > >> should see similar improvements where stats were the bottleneck. > >>>> > >>>> -Jake > >>>> > >>>> > >> >
