Github user HeartSaVioR commented on the issue:

    https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2203
  
    @ptgoetz @revans2 
    
    Here’s my result on performance test:
    
    CLI option:
    org.apache.storm.starter.ThroughputVsLatency 50000 -c 
topology.max.spout.pending=5000
    
    so that utilizes 4 workers by default.
    
    > 1.2.0-SNAPSHOT
    
    ```
    uptime:  210 acked: 1,503,840 acked/sec:  50,128.00 failed:        0 99%:   
   34,734,079 99.9%:      48,103,423 min:       6,541,312 max:      78,381,055 
mean:   13,820,460.15 stddev:    4,842,731.32 user:    173,260 sys:     31,980 
gc:      2,583 mem:     669.23
    uptime:  240 acked: 1,503,740 acked/sec:  50,124.67 failed:        0 99%:   
   33,456,127 99.9%:      53,346,303 min:       6,479,872 max:      80,412,671 
mean:   13,642,800.22 stddev:    4,618,847.37 user:    172,510 sys:     31,690 
gc:      2,513 mem:     614.37
    uptime:  270 acked: 1,503,280 acked/sec:  50,109.33 failed:        0 99%:   
   33,013,759 99.9%:      48,201,727 min:       6,574,080 max:      78,315,519 
mean:   13,656,544.79 stddev:    4,527,513.03 user:    173,000 sys:     31,370 
gc:      2,513 mem:     740.95
    ```
    
    ```
    uptime:  211 acked: 1,503,700 acked/sec:  48,506.45 failed:        0 99%:   
   35,061,759 99.9%:      53,444,607 min:       6,516,736 max:      84,410,367 
mean:   14,023,839.49 stddev:    4,968,132.86 user:    173,490 sys:     33,240 
gc:      2,453 mem:   1,042.78
    uptime:  241 acked: 1,503,920 acked/sec:  50,130.67 failed:        0 99%:   
   32,882,687 99.9%:      53,968,895 min:       6,574,080 max:      81,133,567 
mean:   13,700,645.27 stddev:    4,592,749.72 user:    173,260 sys:     33,190 
gc:      2,465 mem:   1,007.66
    uptime:  271 acked: 1,503,260 acked/sec:  50,108.67 failed:        0 99%:   
   33,275,903 99.9%:      56,262,655 min:       6,582,272 max:      81,199,103 
mean:   13,710,314.71 stddev:    4,676,515.80 user:    173,910 sys:     32,430 
gc:      2,440 mem:   1,065.66
    ```
    
    > Metrics V2
    
    ```
    uptime:  211 acked: 1,503,580 acked/sec:  50,119.33 failed:        0 99%:   
   40,861,695 99.9%:      62,783,487 min:       6,496,256 max:     106,692,607 
mean:   14,696,942.76 stddev:    6,041,492.37 user:    187,800 sys:     32,170 
gc:      2,646 mem:     779.90
    uptime:  241 acked: 1,541,060 acked/sec:  51,368.67 failed:        0 99%:   
   41,779,199 99.9%:      70,778,879 min:       6,639,616 max:     113,115,135 
mean:   14,872,133.61 stddev:    6,435,291.03 user:    219,910 sys:     36,630 
gc:      3,115 mem:     875.09
    uptime:  271 acked: 1,503,780 acked/sec:  50,126.00 failed:        0 99%:   
   41,189,375 99.9%:      63,733,759 min:       6,529,024 max:     104,267,775 
mean:   14,738,586.49 stddev:    6,153,017.22 user:    188,950 sys:     31,950 
gc:      2,815 mem:     891.73
    ```
    
    ```
    uptime:  210 acked: 1,503,520 acked/sec:  50,117.33 failed:        0 99%:   
   47,120,383 99.9%:      89,391,103 min:       6,520,832 max:     142,999,551 
mean:   15,073,527.31 stddev:    7,453,484.52 user:    186,330 sys:     33,150 
gc:      2,808 mem:   1,096.18
    uptime:  241 acked: 1,540,960 acked/sec:  49,708.39 failed:        0 99%:   
   36,012,031 99.9%:      51,281,919 min:       6,688,768 max:      74,055,679 
mean:   14,267,705.37 stddev:    4,971,492.31 user:    186,600 sys:     33,710 
gc:      2,462 mem:   1,192.20
    uptime:  271 acked: 1,541,440 acked/sec:  51,381.33 failed:        0 99%:   
   40,075,263 99.9%:      55,181,311 min:       6,725,632 max:      76,021,759 
mean:   14,850,073.94 stddev:    5,832,959.05 user:    187,380 sys:     32,640 
gc:      2,577 mem:   1,036.03
    ```
    
    The value of 99% and 99.9% latency seems indicating the performance hit. 
Below is the values from 99.9% latency:
    
    * 1.2.0-SNAPSHOT
    avg(48, 53, 48) => 49.6
    avg(53, 53, 56) => 54
    
    * metrics_v2
    avg(62, 70, 63) => 65
    avg(89, 51, 55) => 65
    
    We may could do another perspective of test: putting higher rate and see 
which one reaches the limit first.


---

Reply via email to