Kasper Kondzielski created ARTEMIS-2852:
-------------------------------------------
Summary: Huge performance decrease between versions 2.2.0 and
2.13.0
Key: ARTEMIS-2852
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARTEMIS-2852
Project: ActiveMQ Artemis
Issue Type: Bug
Reporter: Kasper Kondzielski
Attachments: Selection_433.png, Selection_434.png, Selection_440.png,
Selection_441.png
Hi,
Recently, we started to prepare a new revision of our blog-post in which we
test various implementations of replicated queues. Previous version can be
found here: [https://softwaremill.com/mqperf/]
We updated artemis binary to 2.13.0, regenerated configuration file and applied
all the performance tricks you told us last time. In particular these were:
* the {{Xmx}} java parameter bumped to {{16G (now bumped to 48G)}}
* in {{broker.xml}}, the {{global-max-size}} setting changed to {{8G (this one
we forgot to set, but we suspect that it is not the issue)}}
* {{journal-type}} set to {{MAPPED}}
* {{journal-datasync}}, {{journal-sync-non-transactional}} and
{{journal-sync-transactional}} all set to false
Apart from that we changed machines' type we use to r5.2xlarge ( 8 cores, 64
GIB memory, Network bandwidth Up to 10 Gbps, Storage bandwidth Up to 4,750
Mbps) and we decided to always run twice as much receivers as senders.
>From our tests it looks like version 2.13.0 is not scaling as well, with the
>increase of senders and receivers, as version 2.2.0 (previously tested).
>Basically is not scaling at all as the throughput state almost at the same
>level, while previously it used to grow linearly.
Here you can find our tests results:
[https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1kr9fzSNLD8bOhMkP7K_4axBQiKel1aJtpxsBCOy9ugU/edit?usp=sharing]
We are aware that now there is a dedicated page in documentation about
performance tuning, but we are surprised that same settings as before performs
much worse.
Maybe there is an obvious property which we overlooked which should be turned
on?
All changes between those versions together with the final configuration can be
found on this merged PR:
[https://github.com/softwaremill/mqperf/commit/6bfae489e11a250dc9e6ef59719782f839e8874a]
Charts showing machines' usage in attachments. Memory consumed by artemis
process didn't exceed ~ 16 GB. Bandwidht and cpu weren't also a bottlenecks.
p.s. I wanted to ask this question on mailing list/nabble forum first but it
seems that I don't have permissions to do so even though I registered &
subscribed. Is that intentional?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
