couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mikeal Rogers <mikeal.rog...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: write performance on trunk
Date Thu, 01 Jul 2010 22:39:32 GMT
Whoops, i read my graph wrong. We're actually slower for really small docs.

The thing about the small doc test is that the docs are actually so small
that they aren't realistic. I ran the test again with +A 4 added to 0.11 and
it was about twice as bad.

Again tho, these docs are absurdly small so I think that when the documents
size increases the performance of +A balances out. Also, if you had load on
more than one DB +A is going to dramatically improve the performance.

-Mikeal

On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 3:00 PM, Mikeal Rogers <mikeal.rogers@gmail.com>wrote:

> And this is the same test but with much smaller documents:
>
>
> http://mikeal.couchone.com/graphs/_design/app/_show/compareWriteReadTest/e69057a29bd6e4ac4ae0115fac0193c9
>
> The coolest part is that it looks like our read performance has stabilized
> quite a bit.
>
> -Mikeal
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 2:51 PM, Damien Katz <damien@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Awesome! I think most of this is due to Adam and Randall. Nice work guys
>> :)
>>
>> -Damien
>>
>> On Jul 1, 2010, at 2:48 PM, Mikeal Rogers wrote:
>>
>> > I don't know what we did, but in my tests the write performance on trunk
>> is
>> > about 3x faster than 0.11
>> >
>> >
>> http://mikeal.couchone.com/graphs/_design/app/_show/compareWriteReadTest/e69057a29bd6e4ac4ae0115fac018487
>> >
>> > The left vertical column is the average response time in ms and the
>> bottom
>> > horizontal line is the duration in seconds.
>> >
>> > This is comparing 50 writers and 200 readers using large document. I'm
>> also
>> > going to run the test with small documents to see how big the difference
>> is.
>> > Both are running with delayed_commits = false ;
>> >
>> > -Mikeal
>>
>>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message