Dormando,

What exactly do you mean by stack? Do you mean buffering?

I've tried a few options from libmemcached: buffering and no_reply.
Both of them seem to make things much much faster.

With buffering it does 150k/s with no_reply ~750k/s. So it seems
memcached itself is lightning fast it's just the TCP roundtrip slowing
it down.

On Dec 13, 6:10 pm, dormando <[email protected]> wrote:
> > I'm running: Linux AS292 2.6.38-13-generic #52-Ubuntu SMP Tue Nov 8
> > 16:53:51 UTC 2011 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux Ubuntu 11.04
>
> > My CPU is Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-2410M CPU @ 2.30GHz with 2 cores.
> > Pretty high end laptop.
>
> > I've compiled and installed memcached 1.4.10. I've also compiled and
> > installed libmemcached-1.0.2. I've started memchached without any
> > additional options.
>
> > I'm running a simple c++ program to benchmark memcached sets per
> > second. I can only get ~22k sets per second which I think is quite
> > low? I would be expecting at least 50k and even 300k with latest
> > memcached optimizations?
>
> > However maybe I'm completely off with my expectations. Here's the
> > program that I'm running. Is there anything that I'm doing wrong?
>
> > Thanks!
>
> Run two or three more of your applications, or adjust it to run many
> connections in parallel, or to use binary protocol and stack SET's.
>
> memcached will go much faster, but a single process with a single
> connection will be limited by the roundtrip latency.
>
> Using mc-crusher and multigets or multisets over localhost I can hit
> millions:https://github.com/dormando/mc-crusher- but it's not a full
> featured client. If I wanted a real client to go that fast, I would have
> to run many more of them as they'd use a bit more CPU.

Reply via email to