I hate to use your post as an example, Amir, but your post is a perfect example of "according to my benchmark your product did not meet my performance expectations; oh ya, I'm not gonna tell you anything about the benchmark or the environment I was running in." Everybody, please stop doing that. It really isn't helpful... to anyone.
Please resubmit your inquiry including, but not limited to, the following details: Hardware - ie. hard drive details, memory, processors, etc. Network - ie. speed. dedicated network, switch, etc. OS - ie. linux flavor, version, etc. Data - ie. size of keys, size of values, number of keys, etc. Riak specific - ie. config file, n val, backend, etc. Benchmark specific ie. concurrency, transport (http vs pb), time duration of benchmark, key distribution (linear, random, pareto) Best, -Alexander Sicular @siculars On Aug 9, 2012, at 10:32 AM, amir ghaffari wrote: > Hi there, > > I have done a scalability benchmark for Riak DBMS and we couldn't scale up > the throughput beyond 20 Riak nodes. The benchmarking with Basho_Bench has > been run on a 31 node cluster and each node has its own hard disk but the > maximum throughput is on 20 nodes. > > I’d like to understand why Riak didn’t scale e.g. is it the connection, or > other network traffic. I’d like to use some profiling tools to get more > information. Please can you advise us a helpful profiling tool to use? > > Thanks in advance, > > Amir > > _______________________________________________ > riak-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com _______________________________________________ riak-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com
