Hello!

I would start with tuning thread pool sizes if I see CPU under-loaded:

https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/thread-pools

You will need to do thread dump mid-benchmark to see which thread pools are
full.

Regards,
-- 
Ilya Kasnacheev


чт, 22 нояб. 2018 г. в 20:28, summasumma <[email protected]>:

> Hi all,
>
> I am trying to benchmark ignite with ycsb tool as follows:
>
> Ignite Cluster:
> ----------------
> 3 ignite-nodes each running in 1 VM (3 seperate VMs in cluster)
>
> VM details:
> --------------
> CPU: 4 V-CPU (Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-6700 CPU @ 3.40GHz)
> RAM: 16 Gb
> SSD: 40 GB
> Network: 1 Gb/s
>
> Apache Ignite Parameters
> ------------------------------
> Version: Apache Ignite 2.6
> Persistence: Disabled (pure in-memory key-value data store).
> Caches mode: Partitioned / ATOMIC.
> Backups: 1
> Write synchronization mode: PRIMARY_SYNC.
> Max_Size/Initial_Size: 12 GB / 12 GB
>
> YCSB Workload Configuration:
> ---------------------------------
> recordcount=6000000           ----------------> 6 million records each of
> size 1kb (total size:; 5.7 GB)
> operationcount=6000000
> workload=com.yahoo.ycsb.workloads.CoreWorkload
> readallfields=true
> insertproportion=1              ------------------> 100% only INSERT
> operation
> readproportion=0
> updateproportion=0
> scanproportion=0
> requestdistribution=zipfian
> threadcount=100             ------------------->  100 threads
> target=75000                  ------------------->  75k Operations Per
> Second (OPS)
>
> Benchmark Results:
> ----------------------
> [OVERALL], RunTime(ms), 64877
> [OVERALL], Throughput(ops/sec), 46241.34901428858         --------------->
> 46k OPS*******
> [TOTAL_GCS_PS_Scavenge], Count, 87
> [TOTAL_GC_TIME_PS_Scavenge], Time(ms), 162
> [TOTAL_GC_TIME_%_PS_Scavenge], Time(%), 0.2497032846771583
> [TOTAL_GCS_PS_MarkSweep], Count, 2
> [TOTAL_GC_TIME_PS_MarkSweep], Time(ms), 66
> [TOTAL_GC_TIME_%_PS_MarkSweep], Time(%), 0.10173096783143488
> [TOTAL_GCs], Count, 89
> [TOTAL_GC_TIME], Time(ms), 228
> [TOTAL_GC_TIME_%], Time(%), 0.35143425250859317
> [CLEANUP], Operations, 100
> [CLEANUP], AverageLatency(us), 359.8
> [CLEANUP], MinLatency(us), 0
> [CLEANUP], MaxLatency(us), 35775
> [CLEANUP], 95thPercentileLatency(us), 6
> [CLEANUP], 99thPercentileLatency(us), 11
> [INSERT], Operations, 3000000
> [INSERT], AverageLatency(us), 2089.05358  -----------------> 2 MilliSeconds
> Latency
> [INSERT], MinLatency(us), 328
> [INSERT], MaxLatency(us), 64927
> [INSERT], 95thPercentileLatency(us), 3969
> [INSERT], 99thPercentileLatency(us), 6835
>
> As you can see from the benchmark results that:
> Expected OPS: 75k OPS
> Actual OPS result:  only 46k OPS
>
> During this run, i have captured the system resource details as shown
> below:
> CPU (Ignite / YCSB )              :  40% / 35%
> Mem(Ignite / YCSB )              :  6.5 GB / 1.1 GB
> Network(Ignite/YCSB in Mbps):  700rx-350tx / 30rx-500tx
>
> My question is:
> 1. There is no system resource limit hit in both ignite and ycsb, So why is
> that the actual result is not going above 46k OPS ? what is stopping here?
> I
> even tried increasing threads in ycsb but not getting any improvement even
> with that.
>
> 2. On ignite machine, in the top command i can see below ignite app showing
> > 100%:
> ==CPU%   MEM%  VIRT  RES     PID     USER          TIME+ THR  NI S  R/s
> W/s
> Command
> ==141.8    37.1    16.6G 5.76G 19099    root          10:39 86    0 S    0
> 0
> /usr/bin/java -Xms1g -Xmx1g
>
> But the overall cpu display(not individual process cpu as shown above) at
> the top command was never crossed 50% (Load factor is 2 during this time).
> Since its not crossed 50% i assume CPU still has juice to take more ignite
> ops. Is this correct?
>
> 3. Is the latency displayed in ycsb output above(2 millisecond) be still
> optimized? Again network/cpu is not exhausted. So it should be possible? Is
> there a ignite-latency measurement tool (similar to redis?) available?
>
> 4. Any other parameters in the system is blocking to this limit? like tcp
> open connections/tcp buffer size etc) ?
>
> Any help highly appreciated.
> Please clarify.
>
> Thanks
> summa
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/
>

Reply via email to