No problem, I'm trying cut down on cost. We're currently using a dedicated model which works for us on a technical level but is expensive (within budget but still expensive).
We are experiencing weird spikes in evictions but I think that is the result of developers abusing the service. Tbh I don't know what to make of the evictions yet. I'm gong to dig into it on Monday though. On Aug 27, 2016 1:55 AM, "Ripduman Sohan" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Aug 27, 2016 1:46 AM, "dormando" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> > >>> > Thank you for the tips guys! >>> > >>> > The limiting factor for us is actually memory utilization. We are >>> using the default configuration on sizable ec2 nodes and pulling only like >>> 20k qps per node. Which is fine >>> > because we need to shard the key set over x servers to handle the mem >>> req (30G) per server. >>> > >>> > I should have looked into that before posting. >>> > >>> > I am really curious about network saturation though. 200k gets at 1mb >>> per get is a lot of traffic... how can you hit that mark without saturation? >>> >>> Most people's keys are a lot smaller. In multiget tests with 40 byte keys >>> I can pull 20 million+ keys/sec out of the server. probably less than >>> 10gbps at that rate too. Tends to cap between 600k and 800k/s if you need >>> to do a full roundtrip per key fetch. limited by the NIC. Lots of tuning >>> required to get around that. >>> >>> > I think (but may be wrong) the 200K TPS result is based on 1K values. > Dormando should be able to correct me. > > 20K TPS does seem a little low though. If you're bound by memory set size > have you thought of the cost/tradeoff benefits of using dedicated servers > for your memcache? > I'm quite interested to find out more about what you're trying to > optimise. Is it minimising number of servers, maximising query rate, both, > none, etc? > > Feel free to reach out directly if you can't share this publicly. > > > -- > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the > Google Groups "memcached" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/ > topic/memcached/la-0fH1UzyA/unsubscribe. > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "memcached" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
