DZone
Thanks for visiting DZone today,
Edit Profile
  • Manage Email Subscriptions
  • How to Post to DZone
  • Article Submission Guidelines
Sign Out View Profile
  • Post an Article
  • Manage My Drafts
Over 2 million developers have joined DZone.
Log In / Join
Refcards Trend Reports Events Over 2 million developers have joined DZone. Join Today! Thanks for visiting DZone today,
Edit Profile Manage Email Subscriptions Moderation Admin Console How to Post to DZone Article Submission Guidelines
View Profile
Sign Out
Refcards
Trend Reports
Events
Zones
Culture and Methodologies Agile Career Development Methodologies Team Management
Data Engineering AI/ML Big Data Data Databases IoT
Software Design and Architecture Cloud Architecture Containers Integration Microservices Performance Security
Coding Frameworks Java JavaScript Languages Tools
Testing, Deployment, and Maintenance Deployment DevOps and CI/CD Maintenance Monitoring and Observability Testing, Tools, and Frameworks
Culture and Methodologies
Agile Career Development Methodologies Team Management
Data Engineering
AI/ML Big Data Data Databases IoT
Software Design and Architecture
Cloud Architecture Containers Integration Microservices Performance Security
Coding
Frameworks Java JavaScript Languages Tools
Testing, Deployment, and Maintenance
Deployment DevOps and CI/CD Maintenance Monitoring and Observability Testing, Tools, and Frameworks
Join us tomorrow at 1 PM EST: "3-Step Approach to Comprehensive Runtime Application Security"
Save your seat
  1. DZone
  2. Software Design and Architecture
  3. Performance
  4. Optimizations gone wild, O(N!) memory leaks

Optimizations gone wild, O(N!) memory leaks

Oren Eini user avatar by
Oren Eini
·
Dec. 18, 12 · Interview
Like (0)
Save
Tweet
Share
2.07K Views

Join the DZone community and get the full member experience.

Join For Free

so, after doing so much work on the indexing optimization, it turned out that we had a bug. i assume that you remember this optimization, right?

image

in which we were able to pre fetch data from the disk and not have to wait for data at all. this all worked beautifully when running on data sets that included simple indexes. but the moment we had map/reduce indexes, something bad happened. that something bad was that we kept missing the batch that we loaded (this relates to how we load & find the appropriate batches).

we do all the lookups by etag, and map/reduce add gaps in the etags. which meant that we kept missing the etag, and had to start loading things up again. and because whenever we load something we also start loading the next batch…

here is what the memory looked like:

image

yup, for every batch we loaded the next 5 batches, for a total of o(n!) items in memory for everything.

now, we had some cleanup routines, but we did not expect to have that much, so we would recover, eventually, but usually not before we consumed all the memory.

oops!

Memory (storage engine) optimization

Published at DZone with permission of Oren Eini, DZone MVB. See the original article here.

Opinions expressed by DZone contributors are their own.

Popular on DZone

  • Mr. Over, the Engineer [Comic]
  • The Role of Data Governance in Data Strategy: Part II
  • Simulate Network Latency and Packet Drop In Linux
  • Real-Time Stream Processing With Hazelcast and StreamNative

Comments

Partner Resources

X

ABOUT US

  • About DZone
  • Send feedback
  • Careers
  • Sitemap

ADVERTISE

  • Advertise with DZone

CONTRIBUTE ON DZONE

  • Article Submission Guidelines
  • Become a Contributor
  • Visit the Writers' Zone

LEGAL

  • Terms of Service
  • Privacy Policy

CONTACT US

  • 600 Park Offices Drive
  • Suite 300
  • Durham, NC 27709
  • support@dzone.com
  • +1 (919) 678-0300

Let's be friends: