For the record, what Andrew/Li said is pretty much the standard disclaimer in the Performance chapter for EC2. It's a separate class of performance problem.
http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#perf.ec2 On 5/15/12 8:04 PM, "Andrew Purtell" <[email protected]> wrote: >It's not just a matter of having neighbors, and anyway > 0 neighbors >is a performance problem. You'll note in the numbers below that the >local machine had higher CPU use. I expect this was because it was >getting more work done given the lower latency and higher throughput >of non-virtualized IO. > >On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 4:45 PM, S Ahmed <[email protected]> wrote: >> any ideas how many c1.mediums might be on a given physical server? >>(rough >> ideas...) >> >> On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 12:36 AM, Li Pi <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Yup. Virtualized IO pretty much explains it. >>> >>> On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 8:20 PM, Mark Kerzner <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> > Hi, >>> > >>> > I am running a small program to load about 1 million rows into >>>HBase. It >>> > takes 200 seconds on my dev machine, and 800 seconds on a c1.medium >>>EC2 >>> > machine. Both are running the same version of Ubuntu and the same >>>version >>> > of HBase. Everything is local on one machine in both cases. >>> > >>> > What could the difference between the two environments be? I did >>>notice >>> > that my local machine has higher CPU loads: >>> > >>> > hbase 64% >>> > java (my app) 38% >>> > hdfs 20% >>> > >>> > whereas the EC2 machine >>> > hbase 47% >>> > java (my app) 23% >>> > hdfs 14% >>> > >>> > >>> > Sincerely, >>> > Mark >>> >
