Sounds like the problem is with the C# client code, then.
On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 10:36 AM, Heath Oderman <he...@526valley.com> wrote: > Ok, it took me a long time to get py_stress working. > I didn't have thrift / boost / gcc on my debian box :) .... > I'm using this command line believing it's similar to my c# tests from a > remote box: > cnb:~/apache-cassandra-0.6.0-src/contrib/py_stress# python stress.py -o > insert -n 1000000 -d 10.113.0.195 -y super > its wicked fast, as you'd expect. > total,interval_op_rate,avg_latency,elapsed_time > 61765,6176,0.00804715166591,10 > 126667,6490,0.00763260502319,20 > 184952,5828,0.00798357854098,30 > 249697,6474,0.00813590502387,40 > 310190,6049,0.00820316256729,50 > 370394,6020,0.00823702464729,60 > 431557,6116,0.00811347469409,70 > 492085,6052,0.00818783322119,80 > 558895,6681,0.00740800772112,90 > 620426,6153,0.00805101232533,100 > 685168,6474,0.00766180823714,110 > 748768,6360,0.00779282277485,120 > 811008,6224,0.00797537056523,130 > 867327,5631,0.00881408287019,140 > This leaves me further stumped. I guess i will try running py_stress from a > remote box, because I've got to believe it has something to do with the > connection. > Thanks for nudging me toward py_stress. I'm no closer to understanding, but > I have more info! > Stu > On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 1:57 PM, Jonathan Ellis <jbel...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> What kind of numbers do you get from contrib/py_stress? >> >> (that's located somewhere else in 0.5, but you should really be using >> 0.6 anyway.) >> >> On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 12:53 PM, Heath Oderman <he...@526valley.com> >> wrote: >> > So checking it out quickly: >> > vmstat - >> > Never swaps. si and so stay at 0 during the load. >> > iostat -x >> > the %util never climbs above 0.00, but the avgrg-sz jumps bewteen >> > samples >> > from 0 - 30 - 90 - 0 (5 second intervals) >> > top shows the cpu barely working and mem utilization is below 20%. >> > Still slow. :( >> > Thanks for the suggestions. In your article on your blog it'd be >> > awesome to >> > include some implications, like "avgrg-sz over 250 may mean XXX" Even >> > if >> > it's utterly hardware and system dependent it'd give a guy like me an >> > idea >> > if what I was seeing was bad or good. :D >> > Thanks again, >> > Heath >> > >> > On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 1:34 PM, Heath Oderman <he...@526valley.com> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> Thanks Jonathan, I'll check this out right away. >> >> >> >> On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 1:32 PM, Jonathan Ellis <jbel...@gmail.com> >> >> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> You're right, to get those numbers on debian something is very wrong. >> >>> >> >>> Have you looked at >> >>> http://spyced.blogspot.com/2010/01/linux-performance-basics.html ? >> >>> What is the bottleneck on the linux machines? >> >>> >> >>> With the kind of speed you are seeing I wouldn't be surprised if it is >> >>> swapping. >> >>> >> >>> -Jonathan >> >>> >> >>> On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 11:38 PM, Heath Oderman <he...@526valley.com> >> >>> wrote: >> >>> > Hi, >> >>> > I wrote a few days ago and got a few good suggestions. I'm still >> >>> > seeing >> >>> > dramatic differences between Cassandra 0.5.0 on OSX vs. Debian >> >>> > Linux. >> >>> > I've tried on Debian with the Sun JRE and the Open JDK with nearly >> >>> > identical >> >>> > results. I've tried a mix of hardware. >> >>> > Attached are some graphs I've produced of my results which show that >> >>> > in >> >>> > OSX, >> >>> > Cassandra takes longer with a greater load but is wicked fast >> >>> > (expected). >> >>> > In the SunJDK or Open JDK on Debian I get amazingly consistent time >> >>> > taken to >> >>> > do the writes, regardless of the load and the times are always >> >>> > ridiculously >> >>> > high. It's insanely slow. >> >>> > I genuinely believe that I must be doing something very wrong in my >> >>> > Debian >> >>> > setups, but they are all vanilla installs, both 64 bit and 32 bit >> >>> > machines, >> >>> > 64bit and 32 bit installs. Cassandra packs taken from >> >>> > http://www.apache.org/dist/cassandra/debian. >> >>> > I am using Thrift, and I'm using a c# client because that's how I >> >>> > intend to >> >>> > actually use Cassandra and it seems pretty sensible. >> >>> > An example of what I'm seeing is: >> >>> > 5 Threads Each writing 100,000 Simple Entries >> >>> > OSX: 1 min 16 seconds ~ 6515 Entries / second >> >>> > Debian: 1 hour 15 seconds ~ 138 Records / second >> >>> > 15 Threads Each writing 100,000 Simple Entries >> >>> > OSX: 2min 30 seconds seconds writing ~10,000 Entries / second >> >>> > Debian: 1 hour 1.5 minutes ~406 Entries / second >> >>> > 20 Threads Each Writing 100,000 Simple Entries >> >>> > OSX: 3min 19 seconds ~ 10,050 Entries / second >> >>> > Debian: 1 hour 20 seconds ~ 492 Entries / second >> >>> > If anyone has any suggestions or pointers I'd be glad to hear them. >> >>> > Thanks, >> >>> > Stu >> >>> > Attached: >> >>> > 1. CassLoadTesting.ods (all my results and graphs in OpenOffice >> >>> > format >> >>> > downloaded from Google Docs) >> >>> > 2. OSX Records per Second - a graph of how many entries get written >> >>> > per >> >>> > second for 10,000 & 100,000 entries as thread count is increased in >> >>> > OSX. >> >>> > 3. Open JDK Records per Second - the same graph but of Open JDK on >> >>> > Debian >> >>> > 4. Open JDK Total Time By Thread - the total time taken from test >> >>> > start >> >>> > to >> >>> > finish (all threads completed) to write 10,000 & 100,000 entries as >> >>> > thread >> >>> > count is increased in Debian with Open JDK >> >>> > 5. OSX Total time by Thread - same as 4, but for OSX. >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >> >> > >> > > >
