directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ole Ersoy <ole_er...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: [ApacheDS] [Performance] Using indices to boost search performance
Date Sat, 02 Sep 2006 23:42:15 GMT
I'm going to read this email as soon as the smoke
clears...

--- Alex Karasulu <aok123@bellsouth.net> wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> I've been testing the search performance boost
> gained from indexing
> attributes before starting development on an
> optimization to improve
> index performance and in memory size.  I thought I'd
> share these
> dramatic results of my pre-optimization tests with
> you since they
> clearly show the benefits of indices.
> 
> Before I do this let me list the characteristics of
> the hardware used
> and my configuration settings:
> 
> 
> -------------
> Machine Setup
> -------------
> 
> CPU: Dual Athlon MP 1900
> OS: Linux 2.6.15
> Mem: 2GB 266Mhz
> 
> 
> --------------
> ApacheDS Setup
> --------------
> 
> ApacheDS: Stock RC4 (to be released pre-image) w/
> modifications
>    - Using 1024MB Memory
>    - Indexed st and initials
> 
> 
> ----------
> Data Setup
> ----------
> 
> Wrote a simple tool to generate random values for
> descent sized entries.
>   The data sort of looks like this for a user entry:
> 
> 	dn: uid=user.1,ou=users,dc=example,dc=com
> 	uid: user.1
> 	initials: yq
> 	description: cFocJATNuhlXisDCqGtY
> 	pager: FYyimqyZRW
> 	cn: HSGMzajYKmicUTe
> 	postalcode: WiXXA
> 	st: xy	
> 	street: kpCCqmrsCzkpdtHXWMfY
> 	l: KqmAXFYTrI
> 	objectclass: person
> 	objectclass: organizationalPerson
> 	objectclass: inetOrgPerson
> 	sn: nuymgOwpm
> 	homephone: PERamkCtsv
> 	mobile: vkIviOGNTC
> 	telephonenumber: 7248889026
> 	mail: pYvEoOjSnEymcWD
> 	givenname: IVHJZB
> 	postaladdress: crObexKoUTIFdzNHcZMr
> 	employeenumber: 1
> 	userpassword:: cGFzc3dvcmQ=
> 
> I started loading a partition up with these entries
> 100,000 of them at a
> time then performing the following searches for all
> entries with
> initials aa:
> 
> (1) index on initials but no cached entries
> (2) index on initials with cached entries
> (3) no index without cached entries
> 
> Here are the results at the various capacities:
> 
> ---------------
> 100,000 Entries
> ---------------
> 
>      [cached] [indexed] [time (seconds)]
> 
> (1)    no       yes        3.30
> (2)    yes      yes        0.72
> (3)    no       no         30.63
> 
> search results = 153 entries
> 
> 
> ---------------
> 200,000 Entries
> ---------------
> 
>      [cached] [indexed] [time (seconds)]
> 
> (1)    no       yes        6.04
> (2)    yes      yes        1.44
> (3)    no       no         82
> 
> search results = 302 entries
> 
> 
> ---------------
> 300,000 Entries
> ---------------
> 
>      [cached] [indexed] [time (seconds)]
> 
> (1)    no       yes        7.54
> (2)    yes      yes        1.95
> (3)    no       no         146
> 
> search results = 451 entries
> 
> 
> ---------------
> 400,000 Entries
> ---------------
> 
>      [cached] [indexed] [time (seconds)]
> 
> (1)    no       yes        9.24
> (2)    yes      yes        3.80
> (3)    no       no         196
> 
> search results = 586 entries
> 
> 
> ---------------
> 500,000 Entries
> ---------------
> 
>      [cached] [indexed] [time (seconds)]
> 
> (1)    no       yes        11.96
> (2)    yes      yes        3.21
> (3)    no       no         224
> 
> search results = 748 entries
> 
> 
> Alex
> 
> 
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

Mime
View raw message