couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Robert Samuel Newson <rnew...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Couchdb benchmark shows weird behaviour
Date Wed, 09 Apr 2014 20:37:34 GMT
By "a three node couchdb cluster" do you mean BigCouch? If not, then you have three independent
couchdb servers, so your findings aren’t that surprising.

B.

On 9 Apr 2014, at 17:36, Alexander Shorin <kxepal@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 7:11 PM, Arnaud Schoonjans
> <arnaud.schoonjans@student.kuleuven.be> wrote:
>> The purpose of the firewall rule in the middle of the benchmark is to
>> simulate network-failure. The benchmark test examines how the couchdb
>> database reacts to a network partition by looking at the latency of the
>> different operations in time.
> 
> Side note: if you really want to test behavior on unstable networks, use netem
> http://www.linuxfoundation.org/collaborate/workgroups/networking/netem
> Since destination down is quite trivial case and you only can test
> there timeouts and request repeating. Packets loss, corruption and
> duplication, rate limiting and delays are the real behavior of the
> real unstable networks, especially like wifi and 3g.
> 
> About the subj: what have you used for balancing? Are you sure that
> this phenomena isn't balancer issue which tries to reach "failed" node
> before try the next one - that could cause the latency.
> 
> As usual for any benchmarks, it would be good to see numbers and
> how-to guide to reproduce test bench and results locally.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> --
> ,,,^..^,,,


Mime
View raw message