You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@cassandra.apache.org by Shing Hing Man <ma...@yahoo.com> on 2014/09/26 23:39:26 UTC
Apache Cassandra 2.1.0 : cassandra-stress performance discrepancy between SSD and SATA drive
Hi,
I have run cassandra-stress write and cassandra-stress read on my office PC and on my home PC.
Office PC : Intel Core i7-4479, 8 virtual core, 16G RAM, 500G SSD Home PC : Intel Xeon E3-1230V3, 8 virtual core, 8G RAM, 500G SATA disk.
From the cassandra-stress result (please see below), it seems Cassandra ismore than 100% performant on my home PC than the office PC. I am expecting the other way around, as my office PC has much better hardware.
Office : Intel Core i7-4479, 9 virtual cores, 16G RAM, 500G SSDcauchy:~/installed/cassandra/tools/bin> ./cassandra-stress write
Running with 8 threadCount
Results:
op rate : 11264
partition rate : 11264
row rate : 11264
latency mean : 0.7
latency median : 0.4
latency 95th percentile : 0.9
latency 99th percentile : 1.6
latency 99.9th percentile : 5.3
latency max : 325.3
Total operation time : 00:02:40
cauchy:~/installed/cassandra/tools/bin> ./cassandra-stress read
Running with 8 threadCount
Results:
op rate : 13702
partition rate : 13702
row rate : 13702
latency mean : 0.5
latency median : 0.5
latency 95th percentile : 0.8
latency 99th percentile : 1.4
latency 99.9th percentile : 3.4
latency max : 67.1
Total operation time : 00:00:30
---------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------
Home: Intel Xeon E3-1230V3, 8 virtual core, 8G RAM, 500G SATA disk.
matmsh@gauss:~/installed/cassandra/tools/bin> ./cassandra-stress write
Running with 8 threadCount
Results:
op rate : 25181
partition rate : 25181
row rate : 25181
latency mean : 0.3
latency median : 0.2
latency 95th percentile : 0.3
latency 99th percentile : 0.5
latency 99.9th percentile : 16.7
latency max : 331.0
Total operation time : 00:03:24
gauss:~/installed/cassandra/tools/bin> ./cassandra-stress read
Results:
op rate : 35338
partition rate : 35338
row rate : 35338
latency mean : 0.2
latency median : 0.2
latency 95th percentile : 0.3
latency 99th percentile : 0.4
latency 99.9th percentile : 1.1
latency max : 17.7
Total operation time : 00:00:30
Is the above result expected ?
Thanks in advance for any suggestions !
Shing
Re: Apache Cassandra 2.1.0 : cassandra-stress performance discrepancy between SSD and SATA drive
Posted by Shing Hing Man <ma...@yahoo.com>.
I have run a sysbench file io test on my home PC and office PC. The result is given below. The result shows my office PC (with a SSD) is about 3 times more performant than my home PC (with a sata hard disk).
Home PC :
gauss:~> sysbench --test=fileio --file-total-size=50G prepare
sysbench 0.5: multi-threaded system evaluation benchmark
128 files, 409600Kb each, 51200Mb total
Creating files for the test...
Extra file open flags: 0
Creating file test_file.0
Creating file test_file.1
Creating file test_file.2
.........
Creating file test_file.125
Creating file test_file.126
Creating file test_file.127
53687091200 bytes written in 626.30 seconds (81.75 MB/sec).
matmsh@gauss:~> sysbench --test=fileio --file-total-size=50G --file-test-mode=rndrw --init-rng=on --max-time=300 --max-requests=0 run
sysbench 0.5: multi-threaded system evaluation benchmark
Running the test with following options:
Number of threads: 1
Random number generator seed is 0 and will be ignored
Extra file open flags: 0
128 files, 400Mb each
50Gb total file size
Block size 16Kb
Number of IO requests: 0
Read/Write ratio for combined random IO test: 1.50
Periodic FSYNC enabled, calling fsync() each 100 requests.
Calling fsync() at the end of test, Enabled.
Using synchronous I/O mode
Doing random r/w test
Threads started!
Operations performed: 14521 reads, 9680 writes, 30976 Other = 55177 Total
Read 226.89Mb Written 151.25Mb Total transferred 378.14Mb (1.2605Mb/sec)
80.67 Requests/sec executed
General statistics:
total time: 300.0030s
total number of events: 24201
total time taken by event execution: 186.0749s
response time:
min: 0.00ms
avg: 7.69ms
max: 132.43ms
approx. 95 percentile: 19.57ms
Threads fairness:
events (avg/stddev): 24201.0000/0.00
execution time (avg/stddev): 186.0749/0.00
gauss:~>
===============================
Office PC :
shing@cauchy:~> sysbench --test=fileio --file-total-size=50G prepare
sysbench 0.5: multi-threaded system evaluation benchmark
128 files, 409600Kb each, 51200Mb total
Creating files for the test...
Extra file open flags: 0
Creating file test_file.0
Creating file test_file.1
Creating file test_file.2
Creating file test_file.3
...Creating file test_file.122
Creating file test_file.123
Creating file test_file.124
Creating file test_file.125
Creating file test_file.126
Creating file test_file.127
53687091200 bytes written in 175.55 seconds (291.66 MB/sec).
cauchy:~> sysbench --test=fileio --file-total-size=50G --file-test-mode=rndrw --init-rng=on --max-time=300 --max-requests=0 run
sysbench 0.5: multi-threaded system evaluation benchmark
Running the test with following options:
Number of threads: 1
Random number generator seed is 0 and will be ignored
Extra file open flags: 0
128 files, 400Mb each
50Gb total file size
Block size 16Kb
Number of IO requests: 0
Read/Write ratio for combined random IO test: 1.50
Periodic FSYNC enabled, calling fsync() each 100 requests.
Calling fsync() at the end of test, Enabled.
Using synchronous I/O mode
Doing random r/w test
Threads started!
Operations performed: 43020 reads, 28680 writes, 91723 Other = 163423 Total
Read 672.19Mb Written 448.12Mb Total transferred 1.0941Gb (3.7344Mb/sec)
239.00 Requests/sec executed
General statistics:
total time: 300.0007s
total number of events: 71700
total time taken by event execution: 7.5550s
response time:
min: 0.00ms
avg: 0.11ms
max: 12.89ms
approx. 95 percentile: 0.22ms
Threads fairness:
events (avg/stddev): 71700.0000/0.00
execution time (avg/stddev): 7.5550/0.00
=======================
Shing
On Saturday, 27 September 2014, 10:24, Shing Hing Man <ma...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hi Kevin,
Thanks for the reply !
I do not know the exact brand of SSD in my office PC. But the SSD is only 1 year old, and it is far from full.
On both of office PC and home PC, I untared Apache Cassandra 2.1.0 and then
run "cassandra -f " with the default config, then
run cassandra-stress
Both PCs have Oracle Java 1.7.0_40.
I have noticed there are some parameters for SSD in cassandra.yaml, which I have adjusted, but with no improvement.
It puzzles me Cassandra on my office PC, with far better hardware, could be 100% slower than my home PC.
Shing
On Saturday, 27 September 2014, 5:12, Kevin Burton <bu...@spinn3r.com> wrote:
What SSD was it? There are a lot of variability in terms of SSD performance.
1. Is it a new vs old SSD? Old SSDs can become slower if they’re really worn out
2. was the office SSD near capacity holding other data?
3. what models were they?
SSD != SSD… there is a massive amount of performance variability out there.
… also … more data is needed. JDK versions the same? cassandra versions the same?
what about the config?
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 2:39 PM, Shing Hing Man <ma...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hi,
> I have run cassandra-stress write and cassandra-stress read on my office PC and on my home PC.
>
>
>Office PC : Intel Core i7-4479, 8 virtual core, 16G RAM, 500G SSD Home PC : Intel Xeon E3-1230V3, 8 virtual core, 8G RAM, 500G SATA disk.
>
>
>From the cassandra-stress result (please see below), it seems Cassandra is more than 100% performant on my home PC than the office PC. I am expecting the other way around, as my office PC has much better hardware.
>
>
>
>Office : Intel Core i7-4479, 9 virtual cores, 16G RAM, 500G SSDcauchy:~/installed/cassandra/tools/bin> ./cassandra-stress write
>Running with 8 threadCount
>Results:
>op rate : 11264
>partition rate : 11264
>row rate : 11264
>latency mean : 0.7
>latency median : 0.4
>latency 95th percentile : 0.9
>latency 99th percentile : 1.6
>latency 99.9th percentile : 5.3
>latency max : 325.3
>Total operation time : 00:02:40
>
>
>
>
>cauchy:~/installed/cassandra/tools/bin> ./cassandra-stress read
>Running with 8 threadCount
>Results:
>op rate : 13702
>partition rate : 13702
>row rate : 13702
>latency mean : 0.5
>latency median : 0.5
>latency 95th percentile : 0.8
>latency 99th percentile : 1.4
>latency 99.9th percentile : 3.4
>latency max : 67.1
>Total operation time : 00:00:30
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------
>--------------------------------------------------
>
>Home : Intel Xeon E3-1230V3, 8 virtual core, 8G RAM, 500G SATA disk.
>
>
>matmsh@gauss:~/installed/cassandra/tools/bin> ./cassandra-stress write
>Running with 8 threadCount
>
>
>Results:
>op rate : 25181
>partition rate : 25181
>row rate : 25181
>latency mean : 0.3
>latency median : 0.2
>latency 95th percentile : 0.3
>latency 99th percentile : 0.5
>latency 99.9th percentile : 16.7
>latency max : 331.0
>Total operation time : 00:03:24
>
>
>gauss:~/installed/cassandra/tools/bin> ./cassandra-stress read
>Results:
>op rate : 35338
>partition rate : 35338
>row rate : 35338
>latency mean : 0.2
>latency median : 0.2
>latency 95th percentile : 0.3
>latency 99th percentile : 0.4
>latency 99.9th percentile : 1.1
>latency max : 17.7
>Total operation time : 00:00:30
>
>
>
>
>Is the above result expected ?
>Thanks in advance for any suggestions !
>
>
>Shing
>
>
>
>
>
--
Founder/CEO Spinn3r.com
Location: San Francisco, CA
blog: http://burtonator.wordpress.com
… or check out my Google+ profile
Re: Apache Cassandra 2.1.0 : cassandra-stress performance discrepancy between SSD and SATA drive
Posted by Shing Hing Man <ma...@yahoo.com>.
Hi Kevin,
Thanks for the reply !
I do not know the exact brand of SSD in my office PC. But the SSD is only 1 year old, and it is far from full.
On both of office PC and home PC, I untared Apache Cassandra 2.1.0 and then
run "cassandra -f " with the default config, then
run cassandra-stress
Both PCs have Oracle Java 1.7.0_40.
I have noticed there are some parameters for SSD in cassandra.yaml, which I have adjusted, but with no improvement.
It puzzles me Cassandra on my office PC, with far better hardware, could be 100% slower than my home PC.
Shing
On Saturday, 27 September 2014, 5:12, Kevin Burton <bu...@spinn3r.com> wrote:
What SSD was it? There are a lot of variability in terms of SSD performance.
1. Is it a new vs old SSD? Old SSDs can become slower if they’re really worn out
2. was the office SSD near capacity holding other data?
3. what models were they?
SSD != SSD… there is a massive amount of performance variability out there.
… also … more data is needed. JDK versions the same? cassandra versions the same?
what about the config?
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 2:39 PM, Shing Hing Man <ma...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hi,
> I have run cassandra-stress write and cassandra-stress read on my office PC and on my home PC.
>
>
>Office PC : Intel Core i7-4479, 8 virtual core, 16G RAM, 500G SSD Home PC : Intel Xeon E3-1230V3, 8 virtual core, 8G RAM, 500G SATA disk.
>
>
>From the cassandra-stress result (please see below), it seems Cassandra is more than 100% performant on my home PC than the office PC. I am expecting the other way around, as my office PC has much better hardware.
>
>
>
>Office : Intel Core i7-4479, 9 virtual cores, 16G RAM, 500G SSDcauchy:~/installed/cassandra/tools/bin> ./cassandra-stress write
>Running with 8 threadCount
>Results:
>op rate : 11264
>partition rate : 11264
>row rate : 11264
>latency mean : 0.7
>latency median : 0.4
>latency 95th percentile : 0.9
>latency 99th percentile : 1.6
>latency 99.9th percentile : 5.3
>latency max : 325.3
>Total operation time : 00:02:40
>
>
>
>
>cauchy:~/installed/cassandra/tools/bin> ./cassandra-stress read
>Running with 8 threadCount
>Results:
>op rate : 13702
>partition rate : 13702
>row rate : 13702
>latency mean : 0.5
>latency median : 0.5
>latency 95th percentile : 0.8
>latency 99th percentile : 1.4
>latency 99.9th percentile : 3.4
>latency max : 67.1
>Total operation time : 00:00:30
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------
>--------------------------------------------------
>
>Home : Intel Xeon E3-1230V3, 8 virtual core, 8G RAM, 500G SATA disk.
>
>
>matmsh@gauss:~/installed/cassandra/tools/bin> ./cassandra-stress write
>Running with 8 threadCount
>
>
>Results:
>op rate : 25181
>partition rate : 25181
>row rate : 25181
>latency mean : 0.3
>latency median : 0.2
>latency 95th percentile : 0.3
>latency 99th percentile : 0.5
>latency 99.9th percentile : 16.7
>latency max : 331.0
>Total operation time : 00:03:24
>
>
>gauss:~/installed/cassandra/tools/bin> ./cassandra-stress read
>Results:
>op rate : 35338
>partition rate : 35338
>row rate : 35338
>latency mean : 0.2
>latency median : 0.2
>latency 95th percentile : 0.3
>latency 99th percentile : 0.4
>latency 99.9th percentile : 1.1
>latency max : 17.7
>Total operation time : 00:00:30
>
>
>
>
>Is the above result expected ?
>Thanks in advance for any suggestions !
>
>
>Shing
>
>
>
>
>
--
Founder/CEO Spinn3r.com
Location: San Francisco, CA
blog: http://burtonator.wordpress.com
… or check out my Google+ profile
Re: Apache Cassandra 2.1.0 : cassandra-stress performance discrepancy
between SSD and SATA drive
Posted by Kevin Burton <bu...@spinn3r.com>.
What SSD was it? There are a lot of variability in terms of SSD
performance.
1. Is it a new vs old SSD? Old SSDs can become slower if they’re really
worn out
2. was the office SSD near capacity holding other data?
3. what models were they?
SSD != SSD… there is a massive amount of performance variability out there.
… also … more data is needed. JDK versions the same? cassandra versions
the same?
what about the config?
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 2:39 PM, Shing Hing Man <ma...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> I have run cassandra-stress write and cassandra-stress read on my
> office PC and on my home PC.
>
> Office PC : Intel Core i7-4479, 8 virtual core, 16G RAM, 500G SSD Home PC
> : Intel Xeon E3-1230V3, 8 virtual core, 8G RAM, 500G SATA disk.
>
> From the cassandra-stress result (please see below), it seems Cassandra is more
> than 100% performant on my home PC than the office PC. I am expecting the
> other way around, as my office PC has much better hardware.
>
> Office : Intel Core i7-4479, 9 virtual cores, 16G RAM, 500G SSD
> cauchy:~/installed/cassandra/tools/bin> ./cassandra-stress write
> Running with 8 threadCount
> Results:
> op rate : 11264
> partition rate : 11264
> row rate : 11264
> latency mean : 0.7
> latency median : 0.4
> latency 95th percentile : 0.9
> latency 99th percentile : 1.6
> latency 99.9th percentile : 5.3
> latency max : 325.3
> Total operation time : 00:02:40
>
>
> cauchy:~/installed/cassandra/tools/bin> ./cassandra-stress read
> Running with 8 threadCount
> Results:
> op rate : 13702
> partition rate : 13702
> row rate : 13702
> latency mean : 0.5
> latency median : 0.5
> latency 95th percentile : 0.8
> latency 99th percentile : 1.4
> latency 99.9th percentile : 3.4
> latency max : 67.1
> Total operation time : 00:00:30
>
> ---------------------------------------------------
> --------------------------------------------------
> Home : Intel Xeon E3-1230V3, 8 virtual core, 8G RAM, 500G SATA disk.
>
> matmsh@gauss:~/installed/cassandra/tools/bin> ./cassandra-stress write
> Running with 8 threadCount
>
> Results:
> op rate : 25181
> partition rate : 25181
> row rate : 25181
> latency mean : 0.3
> latency median : 0.2
> latency 95th percentile : 0.3
> latency 99th percentile : 0.5
> latency 99.9th percentile : 16.7
> latency max : 331.0
> Total operation time : 00:03:24
>
> gauss:~/installed/cassandra/tools/bin> ./cassandra-stress read
> Results:
> op rate : 35338
> partition rate : 35338
> row rate : 35338
> latency mean : 0.2
> latency median : 0.2
> latency 95th percentile : 0.3
> latency 99th percentile : 0.4
> latency 99.9th percentile : 1.1
> latency max : 17.7
> Total operation time : 00:00:30
>
>
> Is the above result expected ?
> Thanks in advance for any suggestions !
>
> Shing
>
>
>
--
Founder/CEO Spinn3r.com
Location: *San Francisco, CA*
blog: http://burtonator.wordpress.com
… or check out my Google+ profile
<https://plus.google.com/102718274791889610666/posts>
<http://spinn3r.com>