incubator-couchdb-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Filipe David Manana <fdman...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Read request throughput
Date Thu, 09 Dec 2010 11:04:30 GMT
Hi Huw,

Great news!

I don't expect you to see any significant performance differences
between 1.0.x and 1.1x however.

Thanks for letting us know about your tests.

best regards,

On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 10:09 AM, Huw Selley <huw.selley@netdev.co.uk> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 8 Dec 2010, at 19:24, Filipe David Manana wrote:
>
>> Huw,
>>
>> Today trunk was patched to increase both read and write performance
>> when there are several requests in parallel to the same database/view
>> index file.
>
> Great news :)
>
>>
>> The corresponding ticket is https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-980
>>
>> Would be much appreciated if you could try the latest trunk and report back :)
>
> WOW - I built from svn rev 1043651 (again with Erlang R14B) this morning and have just
performed the same jmeter tests with some good results.
> I am still seeing the same throughput score from jmeter, ~500 requests/s but what is
interesting is that I can now drive up the threadpool count in jmeter from 25 (the value I
had for my last round of testing) up to 750 with no errors - just increased request latency
(which is to be expected).
>
> Processor utilisation also looks more like I would expect:
>
> 09:16:43 AM  CPU   %user   %nice    %sys %iowait    %irq   %soft  %steal  
%idle    intr/s
> 09:16:48 AM  all   19.82    0.00    9.19    0.00    0.04    0.25    0.00
  70.70   6136.20
> 09:16:48 AM    0   43.80    0.00    5.00    0.00    0.00    0.00    0.00
  51.20   1000.20
> 09:16:48 AM    1   38.40    0.00   21.00    0.00    0.00    0.40    0.00
  40.20    460.80
> 09:16:48 AM    2   44.49    0.00   14.43    0.00    0.00    0.00    0.00
  41.08      8.80
> 09:16:48 AM    3   36.87    0.00   24.05    0.00    0.00    0.40    0.00
  38.68    449.80
> 09:16:48 AM    4   45.29    0.00   11.42    0.00    0.00    0.00    0.00
  43.29      0.00
> 09:16:48 AM    5   40.68    0.00   24.65    0.00    0.00    0.00    0.00
  34.67      1.60
> 09:16:48 AM    6   47.20    0.00   14.40    0.00    0.00    0.00    0.00
  38.40      0.00
> 09:16:48 AM    7   13.00    0.00   10.40    0.00    0.00    0.00    0.00
  76.60      0.00
> 09:16:48 AM    8    5.01    0.00   10.82    0.00    0.00    0.00    0.00
  84.17      0.00
> 09:16:48 AM    9    0.00    0.00    0.00    0.00    0.00    0.40    0.00
  99.60    455.40
> 09:16:48 AM   10    0.00    0.00    0.00    0.00    0.00    0.00    0.00
 100.00      0.00
> 09:16:48 AM   11    0.00    0.00    0.00    0.00    0.20    0.40    0.00
  99.40    482.60
> 09:16:48 AM   12    2.00    0.00    8.58    0.00    0.00    0.00    0.00
  89.42     10.40
> 09:16:48 AM   13    0.00    0.00    0.00    0.00    0.00    0.40    0.00
  99.60    488.80
> 09:16:48 AM   14    0.20    0.00    1.40    0.00    0.00    0.40    0.00
  98.00    447.20
> 09:16:48 AM   15    0.60    0.00    0.80    0.00    0.20    1.20    0.00
  97.20   2330.60
>
> The box has HyperThreading enabled but the spread of load over cores looks a lot more
like what I would expect to see.
> I retried this same test against 1.0.1 with a threadpool count of 750 and it manages
~126 requests/s with a high error % (again, to be expected), Am yet to retry against the 1.1.x
branch build I was using as it was on the same box the rev 1043651 build it on.
>
> I have also experimented with increasing the threadpool count against the rev 1043651
build and I can go upto 950 threads with no errors (throughput drops a little at that point).
This is with a default couch configuration (only change is delayed_commits=false).
>
> Also, I noticed your relaximation tool (which looks pretty awesome btw) from reading
COUCHDB-980 so if I get some time I might give that a run on this hardware and see what pretty
graphs it can generate :)
>
> So to summarise: All in all a massive performance win!
>
> Many thanks to both Adam and Filipe for all your help and advice. It's really nice to
see such that couch has such a vibrant community and I hope to be able to contribute more
in the future.
>
> Regards
> Huw



-- 
Filipe David Manana,
fdmanana@gmail.com, fdmanana@apache.org

"Reasonable men adapt themselves to the world.
 Unreasonable men adapt the world to themselves.
 That's why all progress depends on unreasonable men."

Mime
View raw message