Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-cassandra-user-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-cassandra-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 276605873 for ; Tue, 10 May 2011 02:50:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 73887 invoked by uid 500); 10 May 2011 02:50:44 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-cassandra-user-archive@cassandra.apache.org Received: (qmail 73836 invoked by uid 500); 10 May 2011 02:50:43 -0000 Mailing-List: contact user-help@cassandra.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: user@cassandra.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list user@cassandra.apache.org Received: (qmail 73828 invoked by uid 99); 10 May 2011 02:50:43 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 10 May 2011 02:50:43 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RFC_ABUSE_POST,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of jbellis@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.44 as permitted sender) Received: from [74.125.82.44] (HELO mail-ww0-f44.google.com) (74.125.82.44) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 10 May 2011 02:50:38 +0000 Received: by wwa36 with SMTP id 36so5595668wwa.25 for ; Mon, 09 May 2011 19:50:17 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:content-type; bh=6ZDdh75qcYEI8AzRVutDpFHs090crjLM0JFVGKyGy0k=; b=jefh42n26MzDA9n7TINBr9n40Vr3wHDpE9WsHr08M2ZLCVP8HzGopQyOXe7SshxWsh FEPdKTzheRZlUQDex86Dna1sykzfTsYgjIRWiuyUiZ8vRIhypA2q/Ag53+oOPlD4lc3g pLUbZmvdYhgLhIIHwScmeRP1XN6uzhVbcGIUw= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; b=MPpL97z2EiyvbTZ88xJrvjd/1a5G4J6kJx1GGlzQAyNRFQ5LyT5SnO0ZJ8HDz4/err ZPST8HNfQE4v2IjQOHUZETTEgGPTjQn5r+IZ/fdV9MnZ9I2fZOnRHW2OZcOQThuTiGNE ho4F6DjbVud4c/9Fw8HG0CdVS/fdfLWJWpKvU= Received: by 10.216.152.170 with SMTP id d42mr4839093wek.39.1304995817101; Mon, 09 May 2011 19:50:17 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.8.71 with HTTP; Mon, 9 May 2011 19:49:57 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4DC87186.3060806@alex.otherinbox.com> References: <4DAF3A7C.3020903@alex.otherinbox.com> <4DC48E8D.2020501@alex.otherinbox.com> <4DC87186.3060806@alex.otherinbox.com> From: Jonathan Ellis Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 21:49:57 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Ec2 Stress Results To: user@cassandra.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 5:58 PM, Alex Araujo > How many replicas are you writing? > > Replication factor is 3. So you're actually spot on the predicted numbers: you're pushing 20k*3=60k "raw" rows/s across your 4 machines. You might get another 10% or so from increasing memtable thresholds, but bottom line is you're right around what we'd expect to see. Furthermore, CPU is the primary bottleneck which is what you want to see on a pure write workload. -- Jonathan Ellis Project Chair, Apache Cassandra co-founder of DataStax, the source for professional Cassandra support http://www.datastax.com