General Transaction Question dealing with many records - java

I'm working with a code base that is new to me, and it uses iBatis.
I need to update or add to an existing table, and it may involve 20,000+ records.
The process will run once per day, and run in the middle of the night.
I'm getting the data from a web services call. I plan to get the data, then populate one model type object per record, and pass each model type object to some method that will read the data in the object, and update/insert the data into the table.
Example:
ArrayList records= new ArrayList();
Foo foo= new Foo();
foo.setFirstName("Homer");
foo.setLastName("Simpson");
records.add(foo);
//make more Foo objects, and put in ArrayList.
updateOrInsert(records); //this method then iterates over the list and calls some method that does the updating/inserting
My main question is how to handle all of the updating/inserting as a transaction. If the system goes down before all of the records are read as used to update/insert the table, I need to know, so I may go back to the web services call and try again when the system is ok.
I am using Java 1.4, and the db is Oracle.

I would highly recommend you consider using spring batch - http://static.springsource.org/spring-batch/
The framework provides lot of the essential features required for batch processing - error reporting, transaction management, multi-threading, scaling, input validation.
The framework is very well designed and very easy to use.
The approach you have listed might not perform very well, since you are waiting to read all objects, storing them all in memory and then inserting in the database.
You might want to consider designing the process as follows:
Create a cache capable of storing 200 objects
Invoke the webservice to fetch the data
Create an instance of an object, validate and store the data in the object's fields
Add the object to the cache.
When the cache is full, perform a batch commit of the objects in the cache to the database
Continue with step 1
SpringBatch will allow you to perform batch commits, control the size of the batch commits, perform error handling when reading input - in your case retry the request, perform error handling while writing the data to the database.
Have a look at it.

Related

Spring data JPA consumes all the connection objects

I have a scenario where in data is uploaded from excel sheet to mysql db. I am using spring data jpa. And the service calls the entities recursively after stuffing them with data taken from excel sheet to save in db. This creates "unable to acquire jdbc connections" after a certain load.
I tried with #Transactional to know advantage. Then I am thinking of using EntityManager manually in code and control transaction boundary so that all recursive save calls of entities happen within one transaction and thereby one connection object. I just wanted to check would it be a nice idea or is there any other approach I should take which is more performant. Needless to say anyhow I have to do it through entities.
My answer is completely based on the assumption that the way of implementing the requirement is faulty as there isn't any code shared in the question.
By your approach, yes you will run out of the connection as the entity population would surely be much faster than persisting that entity in the database and since you are doing it recursively your application will run out connections at one point of time if the amount of the data is very high, numbers are certainly a factor here.
The other approach I would prefer is that you can prepare your entities(Assuming all the data is for a common entity class) and store in a collection, once it is ready you can persist all of it in one transaction using saveAll() method.
If the data is not for common entities you can create multiple lists of different entities and initiate the DB operations after processing the excel sheet.

Database persist in background

I am developing a dictionary application and using many external sources to collect the data.
This data is collected from those sources only for the first time, after that i persist it to my db and fetch it from their.
The problem i am facing is, some words like set, cut, put etc have 100's of meanings and many examples as well. It takes around 10 seconds to Persist all this data to mysql. I am using mybatis to persist data. And because of this, the response time is getting screwed up. Without this database persist, i get response in 400-500ms, if i show data directly after fetching from sources.
I am trying to find a way to persist the data in background. I am using MVC pattern so dao layer is separate.
Is it a good idea to use threading in the dao layer as a solution? Or should I use some messaging tool like Kafka to send a message to persist the given word in background? What else can I do?
Note: I prefer MySQL as the db right now, will probably use redis for caching later on.
My global answer on question + further comments:
Do not bulk insert with Mybatis foreach. Instead you shall execute the statement in a java iteration over the list of object to store, using ExecutorType Reuse or Batch(Read the documentation).
For transactions, in main mybatis-config xml, configure the environment:
transactionManager type JDBC to manage the transaction in the code session = sessionFactory.openSession(); session.commit(); session.rollback();
transactionManager type MANAGED to let the container manage.
Furthermore, you can let the web app send the response, while a new thread takes its time to store the data.

Processing large number of data

Question Goes like this.
Form one application I am getting approx 2,00,000 Encrypted values
task
Read all Encrypted values in one Vo /list
Reformat it add header /trailers.
Dump this records to DB in one shot with header and trailer in seperated define coloums
I don't want to use any file in between processes
What would be the best way to store 2,00,000 records list or something
how to dump this record at one shot in db. is better to dived in chunks and use separate thread to work on it.
please suggest some less time consuming solution for this.
I am using spring batch for this and this process will be one job.
Spring batch is made to do this type of operation. You will want a chunk tasklet. This type of tasklet uses a reader, an item processor, and writer. Also, this type of tasklet uses streaming, so you will never have all items in memory at one time.
I'm not sure of the incoming format of your data, but there are existing readers for pretty much any use-case. And if you can't find the type you need, you can create your own. You will then want to implement ItemProcessor to handle any modifications you need to do.
For writing, you can just use JdbcBatchItemWriter.
As for these headers/footers, I would need more details on this. If they are an aggregation of all the records, you will need to process them beforehand. You can put the end results into the ExecutionContext.
There are a couple of generic tricks to make bulk insertion go faster:
Consider using the database's native bulk insert.
Sort the records into ascending order on the primary key before you insert them.
If you are inserting into an empty table, drop the secondary indexes first and then recreate them.
Don't do it all in one database transaction.
I don't know how well these tricks translate to spring-batch ... but if they don't you could consider bypassing spring-batch and going directly to the database.

how to create a copy of a table in HBase on same cluster? or, how to serve requests using original state while operating on a working state

Is there an efficient way to create a copy of table structure+data in HBase, in the same cluster? Obviously the destination table would have a different name. What I've found so far:
The CopyTable job, which has been described as a tool for copying data between different HBase clusters. I think it would support intra-cluster operation, but have no knowledge on whether it has been designed to handle that scenario efficiently.
Use the export+import jobs. Doing that sounds like a hack but since I'm new to HBase maybe that might be a real solution?
Some of you might be asking why I'm trying to do this. My scenario is that I have millions of objects I need access to, in a "snapshot" state if you will. There is a batch process that runs daily which updates many of these objects. If any step in that batch process fails, I need to be able to "roll back" to the original state. Not only that, during the batch process I need to be able to serve requests to the original state.
Therefore the current flow is that I duplicate the original table to a working copy, continue to serve requests using the original table while I update the working copy. If the batch process completes successfully I notify all my services to use the new table, otherwise I just discard the new table.
This has worked fine using BDB but I'm in a whole new world of really large data now so I might be taking the wrong approach. If anyone has any suggestions of patterns I should be using instead, they are more than welcome. :-)
All data in HBase has a certain timestamp. You can do reads (Gets and Scans) with a parameter indicating that you want to the latest version of the data as of a given timestamp. One thing you could do would be to is to do your reads to server your requests using this parameter pointing to a time before the batch process begins. Once the batch completes, bump your read timestamp up to the current state.
A couple things to be careful of, if you take this approach:
HBase tables are configured to store the most recent N versions of a given cell. If you overwrite the data in the cell with N newer values, then you will lose the older value during the next compaction. (You can also configure them to with a TTL to expire cells, but that doesn't quite sound like it matches your case).
Similarly, if you delete the data as part of your process, then you won't be able to read it after the next compaction.
So, if you don't issue deletes as part of your batch process, and you don't write more versions of the same data that already exists in your table than you've configured it to save, you can keep serving old requests out of the same table that you're updating. This effectively gives you a snapshot.

How would you go about improving MySQL throughput in this simple scenario?

I have a relatively simple object model:
ParentObject
Collection<ChildObject1>
ChildObject2
The MySQL operation when saving this object model does the following:
Update the ParentObject
Delete all previous items from the ChildObject1 table (about 10 rows)
Insert all new ChildObject1 (again, about 10 rows)
Insert ChildObject2
The objects / tables are unremarkable - no strings, rather mainly ints and longs.
MySQL is currently saving about 20-30 instances of the object model per second. When this goes into prodcution it's going to be doing upwards of a million saves, which at current speeds is going to take 10+ hours, which is no good to me...
I am using Java and Spring. I have profiled my app and the bottle neck is in the calls to MySQL by a long distance.
How would you suggest I increase the throughput?
You can get some speedup by tracking a dirty flag on your objects (especially your collection of child objects). You only delete/update the dirty ones. Depending on what % of them change on each write, you might save a good chunk.
The other thing you can do is do bulk writes via batch updating on the prepared statement. (Look at PreparedStatement.addBatch()) This can be an order of magnitude faster, but might not be record by record,e.g. might look something like:
delete all dirty-flagged children as a single batch command
update all parents as a single batch command
insert all dirty-flagged children as a single batch command.
Note that since you're dealing with millions of records you're probably not going to be able to load them all into a map and dump them at once, you'll have to stream them into a batch handler and dump the changes to the db 1000 records at a time or so. Once you've done this the actual speed is sensitive to the batch size, you'll have to determine the defaults by trial-and-error.
Deleting any existing ChildObject1 records from the table and then inserting the ChildObject1 instances from the current state of your Parent object seems unnecessary to me. Are the values of the all of the child objects different than what was previously stored?
A better solution might involve only modifying the database when you need to, i.e. when there has been a change in state of the ChildObject1 instances.
Rolling your own persistence logic for this type of thing can be hard (your persistence layer needs to know the state of the ChildObject1 objects when they were retrieved to compare them with the versions of the objects at save-time). You might want to look into using an ORM like Hibernate for something like this, which does an excellent job of knowing when it needs to update the records in the database or not.

Categories

Resources