I used utility YCSB - there is ops/sec. It means just get some random record. Full results below:
Host1 [OVERALL], RunTime(ms), 267033 [OVERALL], Throughput(ops/sec), 224691.33028502096 [TOTAL_GCS_PS_Scavenge], Count, 98 [TOTAL_GC_TIME_PS_Scavenge], Time(ms), 2056 [TOTAL_GC_TIME_%_PS_Scavenge], Time(%), 0.7699422917766717 [TOTAL_GCS_PS_MarkSweep], Count, 0 [TOTAL_GC_TIME_PS_MarkSweep], Time(ms), 0 [TOTAL_GC_TIME_%_PS_MarkSweep], Time(%), 0.0 [TOTAL_GCs], Count, 98 [TOTAL_GC_TIME], Time(ms), 2056 [TOTAL_GC_TIME_%], Time(%), 0.7699422917766717 [READ], Operations, 60000000 [READ], AverageLatency(us), 876.4223452166667 [READ], MinLatency(us), 151 [READ], MaxLatency(us), 236159 [READ], 95thPercentileLatency(us), 1298 [READ], 99thPercentileLatency(us), 2571 [READ], Return=OK, 60000000 -- Host2 [OVERALL], RunTime(ms), 259716 [OVERALL], Throughput(ops/sec), 231021.5774153306 [TOTAL_GCS_PS_Scavenge], Count, 142 [TOTAL_GC_TIME_PS_Scavenge], Time(ms), 2342 [TOTAL_GC_TIME_%_PS_Scavenge], Time(%), 0.9017542238445071 [TOTAL_GCS_PS_MarkSweep], Count, 0 [TOTAL_GC_TIME_PS_MarkSweep], Time(ms), 0 [TOTAL_GC_TIME_%_PS_MarkSweep], Time(%), 0.0 [TOTAL_GCs], Count, 142 [TOTAL_GC_TIME], Time(ms), 2342 [TOTAL_GC_TIME_%], Time(%), 0.9017542238445071 [READ], Operations, 60000000 [READ], AverageLatency(us), 851.8991412666667 [READ], MinLatency(us), 163 [READ], MaxLatency(us), 710655 [READ], 95thPercentileLatency(us), 1208 [READ], 99thPercentileLatency(us), 2163 [READ], Return=OK, 60000000 It was remote clients. Server side - 4 hosts (E-2698 v4 2.2 GHz / 40 cores) ср, 16 сент. 2020 г., 13:43 onmstester onmstester <[email protected]>: > Hi, > > > > Do you mean row/sec by ops/sec? or partition/sec (in cassandra terms), if > so then how many rows per op or partition? what's your data model and the > host spec? > > Is your client remote or on the host? > > Sent using https://www.zoho.com/mail/ > > > > > ---- On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 14:11:35 +0430 Sergey Semenoff < > [email protected]> wrote ---- > > > Hi *! > > I think everybody who working with the real BigData know – performance is > very important. > > Unfortunaly our lovely HBase slower then Cassandra approximately in 2 > times > when reading huge amount of data. > > > For example – this is Cassandra the performance test run from 2 hosts > (client side) > > Host1 - Throughput(ops/sec), 231 021 > > Host2 - Throughput(ops/sec), 224 691 > > > > Summary ~450 000. > > HBase shows in the same conditions only 210 000. > > > > Maybe this is one of the reason why Cassandra is more popular (see > https://db-engines.com/en/ranking/wide+column+store) > > I’ve done an improvment which can make HBase faster up 2-3 times (it > depends of many reasons, and sometimes even faster). > > With the improvement HBase speed up to 430 000 ops/sec. > > See the picture in attachment. > > > > If you interested to get this improvement in release you can help to > attract some developers attention here - > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-23887 > > Put some line there with your opinion and vote if you think it could be > useful for your work. > > I believe discussion about this approach can make HBase more useful and > popular. > > > > Thanks for attention) > > With the best regards, > > Pustota
