Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Received: from cust-asf.ponee.io (cust-asf.ponee.io [163.172.22.183]) by cust-asf2.ponee.io (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E763200BCF for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2016 20:02:48 +0100 (CET) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id 8CDB2160B09; Mon, 5 Dec 2016 19:02:48 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id D79B9160B18 for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2016 20:02:47 +0100 (CET) Received: (qmail 41466 invoked by uid 500); 5 Dec 2016 19:02:47 -0000 Mailing-List: contact user-help@ignite.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: user@ignite.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list user@ignite.apache.org Received: (qmail 41456 invoked by uid 99); 5 Dec 2016 19:02:46 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd2-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 05 Dec 2016 19:02:46 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd2-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd2-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 348041AB101 for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2016 19:02:46 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd2-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 2.173 X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.173 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=1.2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.972] autolearn=disabled Received: from mx1-lw-us.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd2-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.9]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3duyLtwOM4J6 for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2016 19:02:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mbob.nabble.com (mbob.nabble.com [162.253.133.15]) by mx1-lw-us.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-us.apache.org) with ESMTP id 8BBA45F58F for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2016 19:02:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from static.162.255.23.37.macminivault.com (unknown [162.255.23.37]) by mbob.nabble.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58388375525C for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2016 10:50:05 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2016 12:02:19 -0700 (MST) From: "javastuff.sam@gmail.com" To: user@ignite.apache.org Message-ID: <1480964539749-9404.post@n6.nabble.com> In-Reply-To: References: <1480725743520-9378.post@n6.nabble.com> Subject: Re: Performance with increase in node MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit archived-at: Mon, 05 Dec 2016 19:02:48 -0000 Actual application is multiple machines and various threads doing get and put. As a simple test which can provide average get and put time, I tried attached test program. Tried same program on multiple physical machines (each with 48 CPU, 40GB Ram) and see similar behavior. To rule out network latency, tried same on single physical machine (48 CPU, 40GB Ram) and see similar behavior. Anybody faced this? How are others using it? (single cache server or multiple nodes) Are there any configurations which I need to tweak? -Sam -- View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Performance-with-increase-in-node-tp9378p9404.html Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.