Hi, Thanks for the testing and performance report!
You said you used the stargate Client package? It is pretty basic, written mainly for convenience for writing test cases in the test suite. Regarding Stargate quality in general, this is an alpha release. It can survive torture testing with PE it seems. It can handle well formed requests. But, the implementation is untuned. For example, there is no caching (yet). The code has not yet been profiled also. I put up an issue for Stargate performance improvement: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-1741 I'm not sure an all-localhost configuration is the best testing scenario. It would be interesting to see how the performance differs with the client remote from both the regionservers and the Stargate instance. - Andy ________________________________ From: Haijun Cao <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Monday, August 3, 2009 2:04:16 PM Subject: stargate performance evaluation I am evaluating the performance of stargate (which btw, is a great contrib to hbase, thanks!). The evaluation program is mostly a simple modification to the existing PerformanceEvaluation program, just replace java client with stargate client and get value as protobuf. All of the software (hadoop, zookeeper, hbase, jetty) are installed on one box. The data set is small, therefore all data are served out of memory. For random read test, with java client (the existing PE program), I can get 19K/s, with stargate client, I can only get 3-4k/s. In both case, pe program run with 100 threads. Increasing number of threads does not seem to help (even hurt the throughput). I am just wondering if this is expected ( I can’t figure out in theory why the throughput drop)? Any idea of possible optimization/configuration change to increase the throughput? Thanks! Haijun Cao
