On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 3:23 PM Riccardo Ferrari <ferra...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > By "small" I mean that currently I have a 6x m1.xlarge instances running > Cassandra 3.0.17. Total amount of data is around 1.5TB spread across couple > of keypaces wih RF:3. > > Over time few things happened/became clear including: > > - increase amount of ingested data > - m1.xlarge instances are somehow outdated. We noted that one of them > is under performing compared to the others. Networking is not always > stable/reliable and so on > - Upgrading from 3.0.6 to 3.0.17 emphasized the need of better > hardware even more (in my opinion). > > Starting from here I believe that i3/r5d are already a much better option > to what we have with a comparable price. > > About the EBS: Yes, I am aware its performance is related to its size (and > type) That is the reason why I was looking into a 600/900GB drive that > already a much better option compared to our raid0 of spinning disks. Both > i3 and r5d are EBS optimized > True, but pay attention to the fine print (from https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/UserGuide/EBSOptimized.html#ebs-optimization-support ): * These instance types can support maximum performance for 30 minutes at > least once every 24 hours... So if you check the *baseline* performance of r5d.xlarge (which also holds for i3.xlarge) you will see up to 106.25 MB/s throughput and up to 6000 IOPS. That's already a lot, but you should still consider that to have a complete picture. -- Alex
