You don't give many details, but I would guess: - your benchmark is not multithreaded - mongodb is not configured for durable writes, so you're really only measuring the time for it to buffer it in memory - you haven't loaded enough data to hit "mongo's index doesn't fit in memory anymore"
On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 8:24 AM, Steve Smith <stevenpsmith...@gmail.com> wrote: > I am working for client that needs to persist 100K-200K records per second > for later querying. As a proof of concept, we are looking at several > options including nosql (Cassandra and MongoDB). > I have been running some tests on my laptop (MacBook Pro, 4GB RAM, 2.66 GHz, > Dual Core/4 logical cores) and have not been happy with the results. > The best I have been able to accomplish is 100K records in approximately 30 > seconds. Each record has 30 columns, mostly made up of integers. I have > tried both the Hector and Pelops APIs, and have tried writing in batches > versus one at a time. The times have not varied much. > I am using the out of the box configuration for Cassandra, and while I know > using 1 disk will have an impact on performance, I would expect to see > better write numbers than I am. > As a point of reference, the same test using MongoDB I was able to > accomplish 100K records in 3.5 seconds. > Any tips would be appreciated. > > - Steve > -- Jonathan Ellis Project Chair, Apache Cassandra co-founder of DataStax, the source for professional Cassandra support http://www.datastax.com
