Tom Nichols wrote:
Hi, I have some questions about insert performance.
I have a single CouchDB 0.9.0 node running on small EC2 instance. I
attached a huge EBS volume to it and mounted it where CouchDB's data
files are stored. I fired up about ruby scripts running inserts and
after a weekend I only have about 30GB/ 12M rows of data... Which
seems small. 'top' tells me that my CPU is only about 30% utilized.
Any idea what I might be doing wrong? I pretty much just followed
these instructions:
http://wiki.apache.org/couchdb/Getting_started_with_Amazon_EC2
Hi, Tom. I believe I read somewhere before that the smallest EC2
instances have a slower and/or higher-latency connection to EBS, so you
might want to consider a large instance, or maybe even a high-memory
small instance and see whether you get better "hardware" performance.
Although strangely, when googling it, the first article I found says
that their benchmarks found no difference between EBS or even the
ephemeral filesystem.
http://www.paessler.com/blog/2009/04/07/prtg-7/monitoring-cloud-performance-with-prtg-comparing-disk-speed-for-instance-stores-and-ebs-volumes-on-amazon-ec2/
On the other hand, here is a forum posting and a random benchmark
indicating that more expensive instances get better throughput:
http://developer.amazonwebservices.com/connect/message.jspa?messageID=125197
http://blog.getasysadmin.com/2009/02/mysql-benchmarks-using-amazon-ec2.html
--
Jason Smith
Proven Corporation
Bangkok, Thailand
http://www.proven-corporation.com
