incubator-couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jan Lehnardt <>
Subject Re: Please report your indexing speed
Date Sun, 04 Mar 2012 09:24:50 GMT
Hey all,

I made another run with a bit of a different scenario.

# The Scenario

I used a modified for inserting data (because it is an order of magnitude faster
than the other methods we had). I added a command line parameter to specify the size of a
single document in bytes (this was previously hardcoded in the script). Note that this script
creates docs in a btree-friendly incrementing ID way.

I added a new script which is basically the lower part of Robert Newson's script.
It creates a single view and queries it, measuring execution time of curl.

And a third (yay) that would run, on my system, different configurations.

See for the scripts.

I ran ./benchbulk $size && ./ for the following combinations, all on Mac
OS X 10.7.3, Erlang R15B, Spidermonkey 1.8.5:

- Doc sizes 10, 100, 1000 bytes
- CouchDB 1.1.1, 1.2.x (as of last night), 1.2.x-filipe (as of last night + Filipe's patch
from earlier in the thread)
- On an SSD and on a 5400rpm internal drive.

I ran each individual test three times and took the average to compare numbers. The full report
(see below) includes each individual run's numbers)

(The gist includes the raw output data from for the 5400rpm run, for the SSDs, I
don't have the original numbers anymore. I'm happy to re-run this, if you want that data as

# The Numbers

for the full data set. It'd be great to get a second pair of eyes to make sure I didn't make
any mistakes.

See the "Grouped Data" sheet for comparisons.

tl;dr: 1.2.x is about 30% slower and 1.2.x-filipe is about 30% faster than 1.1.1 in the scenario

# Conclusion

+1 to include Filipe's patch into 1.2.x.

I'd love any feedback on methods, calculations and whatnot :)

Also, I can run more variations, if you like, other Erlang or SpiderMokney versions e.g.,
just let me know.


On Feb 28, 2012, at 14:17 , Jason Smith wrote:

> Forgive the clean new thread. Hopefully it will not remain so.
> If you can, would you please clone
> And build whatever Erlangs and CouchDB checkouts you see fit, and run
> the test. For example:
>    docs=500000 ./ small_doc.tpl
> That should run the test and, God willing, upload the results to a
> couch in the cloud. We should be able to use that information to
> identify who you are, whether you are on SSD, what Erlang and Couch
> build, and how fast it ran. Modulo bugs.

View raw message