Hello Owen,
Unfortunately I don't have the answer to that question... I
never worked through the Geode Benchmarks so I don't know exactly what
they're testing/validating.
Best regards.
On Fri, 28 Feb 2020 at 18:52, Owen Nichols wrote:
> Thanks Juan, this is fantastic work discovering and mitiga
Thanks Juan, this is fantastic work discovering and mitigating this!
The Benchmarks tests in our pipeline are supposed to catch performance
degradations exceeding 5%. We should all be concerned, how did a 7%
degradation slip through?
> On Feb 28, 2020, at 3:48 AM, Ju@N wrote:
>
> Hello devs,
There appears to be consensus that this is a critical fix.
The following commit has been brought into release/1.12 as the
critical fix for GEODE-7820:
git cherry-pick -x ca7ccbce73d436005fe027f31ee910ee9beeb769
GEODE-7820 has been marked as 'resolved in' 1.12.
Regards
EB
On Fri, Feb 28, 2020
+1
On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 7:40 AM Owen Nichols wrote:
> +1
>
> On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 7:38 AM Udo Kohlmeyer wrote:
>
> > +1, Keep the improvements coming...
> >
> > On 2/28/20 3:48 AM, Ju@N wrote:
> > > Hello devs,
> > >
> > > I'd like to include the fix for GEODE-7820 [1] in release 1.12.0.
+1
On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 7:38 AM Udo Kohlmeyer wrote:
> +1, Keep the improvements coming...
>
> On 2/28/20 3:48 AM, Ju@N wrote:
> > Hello devs,
> >
> > I'd like to include the fix for GEODE-7820 [1] in release 1.12.0.
> > The change avoid unnecessary transformations between java collections an
+1, Keep the improvements coming...
On 2/28/20 3:48 AM, Ju@N wrote:
Hello devs,
I'd like to include the fix for GEODE-7820 [1] in release 1.12.0.
The change avoid unnecessary transformations between java collections and
primitive arrays for every message sent within a Geode cluster (see the
Geo
