As I told, maybe I'm trying to use Riak in an improperly way, but this is a kind of requirement for me and I expected to be able to do it with Riak. I'm looking for a "NoSQL" solution and after try out a few of them, I think that I have two great solutions, Couchbase and Riak. To me, Riak seems to be much more mature, and this is my primary option, but, as I told, I can achieve some numbers with Couchbase that I can't with Riak. Given the maturity of Riak, I'm pretty sure that this is a configuration problem, but I need some help to find out how to solve it. If any one could help me with it, I'll be thankful. I don't want to give up on Riak so fast. Thank you.
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 9:46 AM, Uruka Dark <[email protected]> wrote: > I understand. > To eliminate any problems related to Bitcask, I changed to Memory backend > and now I can store roughly 80 objs/sec. This speed can be achieved hitting > just one of them. > I tried to hit both of them at same time, and the speed drops to roughly > 68 objs/sec (each). > Do you have any suggestion about it? > > Thank you. > > On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 9:20 AM, Sebastian Cohnen < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> You should hit both servers and not just with a concurrency level of 1. >> >> There are many more factors to consider, but these are highly dependent >> on your actual problem (not just a simple benchmark). Just to name a few: >> bitcask settings ( >> http://docs.basho.com/riak/latest/tutorials/choosing-a-backend/Bitcask/#Tuning-Bitcask), >> w-quorum, HTTP vs ProtoBuf, ring_creation_size, ... >> >> On 02.11.2012, at 13:15, Uruka Dark <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I'm hitting just one of them. >> At the beginning I tried to use the default settings (n_val = 3), then I >> started to create the bucket with n_val = 2. I've tested a lot of >> combinations to w, but I could not see any substantial improvement. >> If you have any suggestion, please, let me know. I can do any test. >> >> On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Sebastian Cohnen < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> What level of concurrency are you using in your test setup? Are you >>> hitting both servers with your test? What is your n_val and w? >>> >>> >>> On 02.11.2012, at 03:42, Uruka Dark <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> > Hi, >>> > >>> > I'm new here and with Riak. If I do something wrong, please, let me >>> know. >>> > >>> > I've made a Riak cluster with two identical machines: Intel core i3 >>> 2.3GHz 4GB RAM 1TB HD. They are connected by a gigabit ethernet network. >>> Everything is working fine. I'm using a Bitcask backend. >>> > >>> > I've made a PHP script to do a performance test and find out how fast >>> Riak can be with these settings. What my script is doing is: to store 10000 >>> objects with a 10K long data (string of 10240 x 'A'), and calculating how >>> many objects it stores per second. >>> > >>> > Right now, using Bitcask backend, it can store roughly 68 objects per >>> second. It seems to be a small number to me, but I don't know too much >>> about Riak. I've tested the same script on a Couchbase cluster, with the >>> same settings, and it could store roughly 1000 objects per second. >>> Obviously, on Couchbase test, the data is not sent to non-volatile media >>> immediately. Data is kept in memory to acknowledge the reception as fast as >>> possible, and is sent to non-volatile media in background. I want Riak to >>> behave the same way to increase the "writing speed", but I don't know how >>> to do it or if it is possible. May be I'm trying to do something completely >>> out of the purpose of Riak. >>> > >>> > I've tested Riak with Memory backend too, but it achieved only 72 >>> objects per second. I expected it to work faster with Memory backend, cause >>> there is no disk activity involved on it, but the final result is not that >>> high. >>> > >>> > Again, I don't know if I'm trying to do something inappropriate. I >>> think I'm missing something. >>> > Is there any way to do it? >>> > >>> > If I could not make myself clear, please, let me know. >>> > Thank you. >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > 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
