Thanks J-D, this is my test case: I do read+write mixture performance test, when no setting TTL, the read avg latency is about 200ms, but if setting TTL, the latency change to about 1s. The read throughput is fixed to 500scan/s, there is no limit on the write throughput. Read pattern is scan 1~1000 rows per scan(the records are sequential). The write throughput changed, no setting TTL, it's avg 120,000puts/s, changed to 5,000puts/s. Read throughput decrease a little after setting TTL. I set ttl = 172800 , so that's 2days. I test this at the second day, so it's actually in the range of TTL.
Then, I do only read performance test, the latency is about 200ms whatever setting TTL or not. I can't explain this strange phenomena. Zhou Shuaifeng(Frank) -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jean-Daniel Cryans Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2011 4:45 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Is there any influence to the read performance if setting the TTL of a table? How worse? When you are setting TTL, is data actually getting out of that TTL range at all? I'm asking because "corpses" of rows can slow you down until the major compactions. Should not be noticeable unless you churn through thousands of versions a day within a single region. Basically we need to know more about your test. J-D On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 6:37 PM, Zhoushuaifeng <[email protected]> wrote: > I do some test and find that the scan performance getting worse after I > setting the TTL of a table. Is there any explain to this? Or TTL is not the > case, there may be other reason of the worse performance? > > Zhou Shuaifeng(Frank) > > >
