Dear all, Sorry, I was running the wrong test. Yes, the query performance is 2,300 QPS which is pretty good.
-- Author of books for learning CXF, Axis2, Wicket, JSF (http://www.agileskills2.org) ________________________________ From: Jahangir Mohammed <md.jahangi...@gmail.com> To: user@cassandra.apache.org; Kent Tong <freemant2...@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 5:22 AM Subject: Re: read performance problem There is something wrong with the system. Your benchmarks are way off. How are you benchmarking? Are you using the stress lib included? On Nov 19, 2011 8:58 PM, "Kent Tong" <freemant2...@yahoo.com> wrote: Hi, > > >On my computer with 2G RAM and a core 2 duo CPU E4600 @ 2.40GHz, I am testing >the >performance of Cassandra. The write performance is good: It can write a >million records >in 10 minutes. However, the query performance is poor and it takes 10 minutes >to read >10K records with sequential keys from 0 to 9999 (about 100 QPS). This is far >away from >the 3,xxx QPS found on the net. > > >Cassandra decided to use 1G as the Java heap size which seems to be fine as at >the end >of the benchmark the swap was barely used (only 1M used). > > >I understand that my computer may be not as powerful as those used in the >other benchmarks, >but it shouldn't be that far off (1:30), right? > > >Any suggestion? Thanks in advance! > >
