[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-8342?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14225427#comment-14225427
 ] 

Ryan McGuire edited comment on CASSANDRA-8342 at 11/25/14 11:57 PM:
--------------------------------------------------------------------

http://riptano.github.io/cassandra_performance/graph_v4/graph.html?stats=stats.8342.json

Definitely agree that increasing it doesn't improve things, but not seeing much 
of a dropoff either.

Per Jonathan's suggestion, this test was with load smaller than memory. 
Rereading the guidance text in the yaml, it would seem to suggest testing this 
with a load larger than memory?


was (Author: enigmacurry):
http://riptano.github.io/cassandra_performance/graph_v4/graph.html?stats=stats.8342.json

Definitely agree that increasing it doesn't improve things, but not seeing much 
of a dropoff either.

Per Jonathan's suggestion, this test was with load smaller than memory. 
Rereading the guidance text in the yaml, it would seem to suggest testing this 
with a load larger?

> Remove historical guidance for concurrent reader and writer tunings.
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CASSANDRA-8342
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-8342
>             Project: Cassandra
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>            Reporter: Matt Stump
>            Assignee: Ryan McGuire
>
> The cassandra.yaml and documentation provide guidance on tuning concurrent 
> readers or concurrent writers to system resources (cores, spindles). Testing 
> performed by both myself and customers demonstrates no benefit for thread 
> pool sizes above 64 in size, and for thread pools greater than 128 in size a 
> decrease in throughput. This is due to thread scheduling and synchronization 
> bottlenecks within Cassandra. 
> Additionally, for lower end systems reducing these thread pools provides very 
> little benefit because the bottleneck is typically moved to either IO or CPU.
> I propose that we set the default value to 64 (current default is 32), and 
> remove all guidance/recommendations regarding tuning.
> This recommendation may change in 3.0, but that would require further 
> experimentation.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Reply via email to