cassandra-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kevin Burton <bur...@spinn3r.com>
Subject cassandra-stress on 3.0 with column widths benchmark.
Date Mon, 14 Sep 2015 02:25:45 GMT
I’m trying to benchmark two scenarios…

10 columns with 150 bytes each

vs

150 columns with 10 bytes each.

The total row “size” would be 1500 bytes (ignoring overhead).

Our app uses 150 columns so I’m trying to see if packing it into a JSON
structure using one column would improve performance.

I seem to have confirmed my hypothesis.

I’m running two tests:

./tools/bin/cassandra-stress write -insert -col n=FIXED\(10\)
> size=FIXED\(150\) | tee cassandra-stress-10-150.log
>


> time ./tools/bin/cassandra-stress write -insert -col n=FIXED\(150\)
> size=FIXED\(10\) | tee cassandra-stress-150-10.log


this shows that the "op rate” is much much lower when running with 150
columns:

root@util0063 ~/apache-cassandra-3.0.0-beta2 # grep "op rate"
> cassandra-stress-10-150.log
> op rate                   : 7632 [WRITE:7632]
> op rate                   : 11851 [WRITE:11851]
> op rate                   : 31967 [WRITE:31967]
> op rate                   : 41798 [WRITE:41798]
> op rate                   : 51251 [WRITE:51251]
> op rate                   : 58057 [WRITE:58057]
> op rate                   : 62977 [WRITE:62977]
> op rate                   : 65398 [WRITE:65398]
> op rate                   : 67673 [WRITE:67673]
> op rate                   : 69198 [WRITE:69198]
> op rate                   : 70402 [WRITE:70402]
> op rate                   : 71019 [WRITE:71019]
> op rate                   : 71574 [WRITE:71574]
> root@util0063 ~/apache-cassandra-3.0.0-beta2 # grep "op rate"
> cassandra-stress-150-10.log
> op rate                   : 2570 [WRITE:2570]
> op rate                   : 5144 [WRITE:5144]
> op rate                   : 10906 [WRITE:10906]
> op rate                   : 11832 [WRITE:11832]
> op rate                   : 12471 [WRITE:12471]
> op rate                   : 12915 [WRITE:12915]
> op rate                   : 13620 [WRITE:13620]
> op rate                   : 13456 [WRITE:13456]
> op rate                   : 13916 [WRITE:13916]
> op rate                   : 14029 [WRITE:14029]
> op rate                   : 13915 [WRITE:13915]


… what’s WEIRD here is that

Both tests take about 10 minutes.  Yet it’s saying that the op rate for the
second is slower.  Why would that be? That doesn’t make much sense…

-- 

Founder/CEO Spinn3r.com
Location: *San Francisco, CA*
blog: http://burtonator.wordpress.com
… or check out my Google+ profile
<https://plus.google.com/102718274791889610666/posts>

Mime
View raw message