On Jul 3, 2011, at 4:29 PM, Jeremy Hanna wrote: > Anyone know if secondary index performance should be in the 100-500 ms range. > That's what we're seeing right now when doing lookups on a single value. > We've increased keys_cached and rows_cached to 100% for that column family > and assume that the secondary index gets the same attributes. I've also > reduced read_repair_chance to 0.2 because it doesn't get overwritten very > frequently. > > Is the assumption that rows/keys cached is inherited correct? Is there any > way to see cfstats on secondary index sub-column families?
the answer appears to be no and no. Trying some other stuff with tools mentioned here: http://spyced.blogspot.com/2010/01/linux-performance-basics.html but not seeing anything particularly disk bound, though await (from iostat -x) seems high on one of the devices. One of our guys said he pointed at our realtime nodes (instead of analytic nodes) but said the performance was worse. Granted our analytic nodes are m4.xl and our realtime nodes are currently large, but still with no load on them, it should be quite fast I would think. > > Thanks, > > Jeremy
