[erlang-questions] where it's the best way to store a very big term object shared between processes
Thu Oct 22 22:38:25 CEST 2015
On 10/22/2015 01:29 AM, Caragea Silviu wrote:
> In one of my projects I need to use a radix tree. I found out a very nice library :
> Lookup performances are great. But I have one problem.
> Basically my tree has around 100 000 elements so building it it's an extremely operation. For this reason I'm building it once and all processes that needs to do lookups need to share the btrie object (created using btrie:new/1).
> Here I see several options:
> 1. Use a gen server and store the btrie object on the state or process dictionary. - I didn't tried this
> 2. Use a ets table and store the tire object on a public table where all processes can read and write.
It is easier to scale and is more natural in Erlang if you pursue #1 (using the state, not the process dictionary). The #2 path (including mochiglobal) is typical in imperative programming (mutating global state). With #1 you can manage the reliability of individual processes for fault-tolerance concerns and you would probably start with a single locally registered process name. Then if there is too much contention for the single process that has the btrie, you would switch to using a process group, to share the load with replicated data.
The btrie usage is probably slower than using the newer maps data structure. The trie repo was mainly created for string keys, not binary keys, due to the memory access details in Erlang (i.e., it is easier to have more efficient lookups with string keys, when using process heap data, which includes being more efficient than maps in some cases).
You could also store the key/value lookup as a single large binary that you reference (in multiple processes, since large binaries are reference counted) with something like https://github.com/knutin/bisect which may work too.
> Doing some benchmarks I see that lookup-ing for the longest prefix (btrie:find_prefix_longest) in around 100 K elements by prefix it's around 2- 5 ms and 95% of the time is spent in the ets:lookup.
> I think the time spent there is so big because also my term stored there is very big.
> Any other suggestions ?
> erlang-questions mailing list
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the erlang-questions