> Thanks. Any reason to move item_lock(s) back to cache_lock ? > > We've done preliminary performance runs using memaslap. Memory limits > are altered from 32MB up to 2GB. The total transaction-per-second > numbers drop as the memory limits are increased. All other parameters > take the defaults based on memcached 1.4.11. The thing concerns (and > puzzles) me most is the get hit counts that are flat after memory > limit is set to 256 MB. Get and put ratio is 9:1 (using default). Data > size is 1K, key size is 100 bytes. > > I suspect the flat-ness is caused by slabs_lock. Any one saw a similar > "flat-ness" before (and knows the bottleneck) ? Enclosed a chart that > shows this issue.
I was never able to get good numbers out of memslap, and memaslap is even buggier and worse. mc-crusher should work much better for testing: https://github.com/dormando/mc-crusher it doesn't do short run tests, it does steady state testing while you measure the rate via memcached's stats.
