[Archivesspace_Users_Group] Problems working with archival object with large number of direct children

[Jason Loeffler]

Hi Sally,

Definitely, yes. We have many resources with 5,000 or more archival object
records. We've deployed on some pretty decent Amazon EC2 boxes (16GB
memory, burstable CPU, etc.) with negligible improvement. I have a feeling
that this is not a resource allocation issue. Looking at the web inspector,
most of the time is spent negotiating jstree <http://jstree.com/> and/or
loading* all JSON objects* associated with a resource into the browser.
Maybe an ASpace dev can weigh in.

>From the sysadmin side, Maureen Callahan at Yale commissioned Percona to
evaluate ArchivesSpace and MySQL performance. I've attached the report. Let
me know if you need any help interpreting the report.

At some point, and quite apart from this thread, I hope we can collectively
revisit the staff interface architecture and recommend improvements.

JL

On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 2:37 PM, Sally Vermaaten <sally.vermaaten at nyu.edu>
wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> We're running into an issue with a large resource record in ArchivesSpace
> and wonder if anyone has experienced a similar issue. In one resource
> record, we have a series/archival object with around 19,000 direct
> children/archival objects. We've found that:
>
>    - it takes several minutes to open the series in the 'tree' navigation
>    view and then, once opened scrolling through series is very slow / laggy
>    - it takes a couple of minutes to open any archival object in the
>    series in edit mode and
>    - it takes a couple of minutes to save changes to any archival object
>    within the series
>
> Does anyone else have a similarly large archival object in a resource
> record? If so, have you observed the same long load/save time when editing
> the component records?
>
> The slow load time does not seem to be affected by memory allocation;
> we've tried increasing the speed / size of the server and it seemed to have
> no effect. We'd definitely appreciate any other suggestions for how we
> might fix or work around the problem.
>
> We also wonder if this performance issue is essentially caused by the
> queries being run to generate the UI view - i.e. perhaps in generating the
> resource 'tree' view, all data for the whole series (all 19k archival
> objects) is being retrieved and stored in memory? If so, we wondered if it
> would be possible and would make sense to change the queries running during
> tree generation, etc. to only retrieve some batches at a time, lazy loading
> style?
>
> Thanks,
> Weatherly and Sally
>
> --
> Sally Vermaaten
> Project Manager, Archival Systems
> New York University Libraries
> 1-212-992-6259
>
> _______________________________________________
> Archivesspace_Users_Group mailing list
> Archivesspace_Users_Group at lyralists.lyrasis.org
> http://lyralists.lyrasis.org/mailman/listinfo/archivesspace_users_group
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lyralists.lyrasis.org/pipermail/archivesspace_users_group/attachments/20161115/41bbc85b/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: report.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 81907 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lyralists.lyrasis.org/pipermail/archivesspace_users_group/attachments/20161115/41bbc85b/attachment.pdf>