লো-লেটেন্সির জন্য Disruptor প্যাটার্ন শিখুন এবং কিউ, মেমোরি, ও আর্কিটেকচারের সিদ্ধান্ত নিয়ে কীভাবে রিয়েল-টাইম সিস্টেমে পূর্বানুমেয় রেসপন্স টাইম ডিজাইন করা যায় তা জানুন।

Averages hide rare pauses. If most actions are fast but a few take much longer, users notice the spikes as stutter or “lag,” especially in real-time flows where rhythm matters.
Track tail latency (like p95/p99) because that’s where the noticeable pauses live.
Throughput is how much work you finish per second. Latency is how long one action takes end-to-end.
You can have high throughput while still having occasional long waits, and those waits are what make real-time apps feel slow.
Tail latency (p95/p99) measures the slowest requests, not the typical ones. p99 means 1% of operations take longer than that number.
In real-time apps, that 1% often shows up as visible jitter: audio pops, rubber-banding, flickering indicators, or missed ticks.
Most time is usually spent waiting, not computing:
A 2 ms handler can still produce 60–80 ms end-to-end if it waits in a few places.
Common jitter sources include:
To debug, correlate spikes with allocation rate, context switches, and queue depth.
Disruptor is a pattern for moving events through a pipeline with small, consistent delays. It uses a preallocated ring buffer and sequence numbers instead of a typical shared queue.
The goal is to reduce unpredictable pauses from contention, allocation, and wakeups—so latency stays “boring,” not just fast on average.
Preallocate and reuse objects/buffers in the hot loop. This reduces:
Also keep event data compact so the CPU touches less memory per event (better cache behavior).
Start with a single-writer path per shard when you can (easier to reason about, less contention). Scale by sharding keys (like userId/instrumentId) instead of having many threads fight over one shared queue.
Use worker pools only for truly independent work; otherwise you often trade throughput gains for worse tail latency and harder debugging.
Batching reduces overhead, but it can add waiting if you hold events to fill a batch.
A practical rule is to cap batching by time and size (for example: “up to N events or up to T microseconds, whichever comes first”) so batching can’t silently break your latency budget.
Write a latency budget first (target and p99), then split it across stages. Map every handoff (queues, thread pools, network hops, storage calls) and make waiting visible with metrics like queue depth and per-stage time.
Keep blocking I/O off the critical path, use bounded queues, and decide overload behavior up front (drop, shed load, coalesce, or backpressure). If you’re prototyping on Koder.ai, Planning Mode can help you sketch these boundaries early, and snapshots/rollback make it safer to test changes that affect p99.