Hi,
Thanks for trying Riak.
On 21 Feb 2013, at 23:48, Belai Beshah <belai.bes...@nwgeo.com> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> We are evaluating Riak to see if it can be used to cache large blobs of data.
> Here is our test cluster setup:
>
> • six Ubuntu LTS 12.04 dedicated nodes with 8 core 2.6 Ghz CPU, 32 GB
> RAM, 3.6T disk
> • {pb_backlog, 64},
> • {ring_creation_size, 256},
> • {default_bucket_props, [{n_val, 2},
> {allow_mult,false},{last_write_wins,true}]},
> • using bitcask as the backend
>
> Everything else default except the above. There is an HAProxy load balancer
> infront of the nodes that the clients talk too configured according to the
> basho wiki. Due to the nature of the application we are integrating we do
> about 1200/s writes of approximately 40-50KB each and read them back almost
> immediately. We noticed a lot of read repairs and since that was one of the
> things that could indicate performance problem we go worried. So we wrote a
> simple java client application that simulates our use case. The test program
> is dead simple:
> • generate keys using random UUID and value using Apache commons
> RandomStringUtils
> • create a thread pool of 5 and store key/value using “bucket.store()”
> • read the values back using “bucket.fetch()” multiple times
> I could provide the spike code if needed. What we noticed is that we get a
> lot of read repairs all over the place. We even made it use a single thread
> to read/write, played with the write/read quorum and even put a delay of 5
> minutes between the writes before the reads start to give the cluster time to
> be eventually consistent. Nothing helps, we always see a lot of read repairs,
> sometime as many as the number of inserts.
It sounds like you are experiencing this bug
https://github.com/basho/riak_kv/pull/334
It is fixed in master, but it doesn't look like it made it into 1.3.0. If
you're ok with building from source, I tried it and a patch from
8895d2877576af2441bee755028df1a6cf2174c7 goes cleanly onto 1.3.0.
Cheers
Russell
> The good thing is that in all of these tests we have not seen any read
> failures. Performance is also not bad, a few maxs here and there we don't
> like but 90% looks good. Even when we killed a node, the reads are still
> successful.
>
> We are wondering what the expected ratio of read repairs is and what is a
> reasonable time for the cluster not to restore to read_repair to fulfill a
> read request or is there something we are missing in our setup.
>
> Thanks
> Belai
> _______________________________________________
> riak-users mailing list
> riak-users@lists.basho.com
> http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com
_______________________________________________
riak-users mailing list
riak-users@lists.basho.com
http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com
