Hi Paul,

How is your bucket set up?

Note that by default, you'll have replication set to 1, so when you go from one 
node to two nodes, you actually increase the reliability and thus the work a 
bit without actually increasing net capacity.

It may also be helpful if you give us a sense of the system under test and the 
numbers you're seeing.  Note that there is a package distributed with 
libcouchbase<http://www.couchbase.com/communities/c/getting-started> that 
includes a workload generator named pillowfight.  There's also a Java workload 
generator named RoadRunner<https://github.com/daschl/RoadRunner>.

Thanks,

Matt

From: asdf9898 <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Reply-To: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Date: Thursday, January 30, 2014 4:00 AM
To: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: couchbase scale out performance

Hello

I am new to nosql in general and would like some advice on couchbase and other 
similar technologies.

I have done some performance testing of a number of technologies and find the 
same results with each.

When I do x inserts on a single node I get better performance than when I add a 
second node.

Read-performance is much better than insert performance but again a single node 
performs better than 2 nodes.

I then thought that if I add the URIs in the buildConnection

                URI server = new URI(addresses);
                ArrayList<URI> serverList = new ArrayList<URI>();
                serverList.add(server);
                CouchbaseClient client = new CouchbaseClient(
                        serverList, "default", "");

In other words by explicitly telling the client about the second node it should 
cause double performance but sadly I just got maybe an extra 10%

I then thought if I double the number of client threads because I now have two 
servers to target it would double performance but again no: just a slight 
increase.

So in summary : would adding an extra node cause an increase or decrease in 
throughput (both reading and inserts) ?

And I am getting the same behaviour using other well known nosql technologies 
too.

Many thanks in advance.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Couchbase" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to 
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


--
Matt Ingenthron
Couchbase, Inc.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Couchbase" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to