-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 35
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
Bad performance when saving in releases after 4.4.0 #179
Comments
…on based on the latest commit to 4.4.0 with added methods for Domino 10+ (OpenNTF#179)
I have made a workaound: I needed methods from Domino 10+ so I have made a 4.4.1 version which is based on the latest commit to 4.4.0 with added methods for Domino 10+. See this branch in my fork. |
I'm using the v10.0.1 and haven't noticed the delay yet. Is there a specific method (e.g. |
From the original discussion in Slack at https://openntf.slack.com/archives/C0A6JTYBX/p1644511047835769 you can see that I found that the removeItem method slowed things down. |
I ran some tests with 10.0.1 & 11.0.1, but don't notice any performance issues for I also have |
hasItem causes Session Evaluate calls due to session.evaluate("@DocFields", doc) |
This issue was first reported in the OpenNTF Slack channel in February 2022.
I have code that with ODA 4.4 consistently takes 2-3 seconds to complete on my local 12.0.1 test server (running in a VM on my PC). When I update ODA to newer versions the same code consistently takes a lot longer to complete (6-7 seconds vs 2-3 seconds). In both cases I have run the test case 3 times and straight after a HTTP restart. So the only change is an upgrade of ODA in the update site db.
I see the bad performance with ODA 10.0.0, 10.0.1 and 11.0.1 (and the 12.0.1 snapshot release that Jesse Gallagher built for me).
I have looked at commits to Database.java and Document.java from the 4.4.0 release from Feb 8, 2018 to the 10.0.0 release from Oct 26, 2018 but I have not been able to find a code commit that could appear to be the cause of the bad performance.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: