Luke, Yes, the load looks pretty small in our cluster and that explains what I saw. It is interesting to see the difference of the performance between NoSQL with server-side sharding.
Anyway, thanks for your reply. I'm confident with the result now. Satoshi 2014/1/22 Luke Bakken <[email protected]> > Satoshi, > > The difference in performance between w=1 and w=3 depends a lot on > your cluster setup and hardware, as well as cluster load. > > In your tests, your cluster is most likely under no load, and all > vnodes are ready to process incoming messages. In this case w=1 and > w=3 will have little difference in response time since vnodes will be > able to respond immediately to the write message. > > A better test would be to increase cluster load with a tool like > basho_bench and benchmark Riak and Cassandra using that tool. > -- > Luke Bakken > CSE > [email protected] > > > On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 9:55 PM, Satoshi Yamada <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Luke, > > > > Thanks for your reply. > > > > Actually, the size of the data we use for our product is as small as > > hundreds bytes. > > I use such data as 330MB because I thought the difference of performance > > gets clearer by > > storing big data. I did test similarly when the data size is 1MB and > 100B, > > but did not > > see much difference either. > > > > thanks, > > Satoshi > > > > > > > > > > 2014/1/20 Luke Bakken <[email protected]> > >> > >> Hi Satoshi, > >> > >> When using Riak, your object sizes should ideally be 1MB or less. A > >> 330MB object will never result in acceptable Riak performance. > >> > >> If you intend to store large objects like this I strongly recommend > >> using Riak CS, which will break up the object for you into chunks that > >> can be managed by Riak. It also provides an S3-compatible API. > >> > >> Please read more about Riak CS here: > http://docs.basho.com/riakcs/latest/ > >> > >> Thanks > >> -- > >> Luke Bakken > >> CSE > >> [email protected] > >> > >> > >> On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 9:29 PM, Satoshi Yamada <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > Hi, i'm Satoshi, new to riak. > >> > > >> > I would like to check how consistency changes impacts on the > performance > >> > of > >> > riak cluster. I used w=1 and w=3, and I expected at least two times > more > >> > of > >> > execution time, but there seems no significant change. I saw more > >> > difference > >> > in Cassandra, so I wonder if it's normal in riak or there is something > >> > wrong > >> > in my testing. Can anyone give me some advice on it? > >> > > >> > I simply checked as shown below. > >> > > >> > w=1 > >> > $ time curl -v -XPUT > >> > http://mycluster.com:8098/buckets/w1/keys/data.tar.gz?w=1 -H > >> > "X-Riak-Vclock: > >> > a85hYGB.........." -H "Content-Type: text/plain" --data-binary > >> > @data.tar.gz > >> > ... > >> > ... > >> > ... > >> > real 0m27.501s > >> > user 0m0.378s > >> > sys 0m0.674s > >> > > >> > w=3 > >> > $ time curl -v -XPUT > >> > http://mycluster.com:8098/buckets/w3/keys/data.tar.gz?w=3 -H > >> > "X-Riak-Vclock: > >> > a85hYGB.........." -H "Content-Type: text/plain" --data-binary > >> > @data.tar.gz > >> > ... > >> > ... > >> > ... > >> > real 0m29.278s > >> > user 0m0.398s > >> > sys 0m0.674s > >> > > >> > My cluster consists of 40, all active and healthy machines and running > >> > riak-1.4.1. > >> > The data I use is 330MB. > >> > > >> > Thanks in advance, > >> > Satoshi > >> > > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > 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
