thetumbled commented on issue #4247:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/issues/4247#issuecomment-2102144769

   List some data collected from the production enviroment after we lauch this 
feature. 
   A direct way to evaluate the performance of a load balancing algorithm is to 
look at the indicators we are concerned about, specifically P99 write latency.  
What is more, we care about the standard deviation of journal disk write 
throughput , the range of journal disk write throughput, and the top 10 of 
journal disk write throughput .
   Let's take a look at the comparison of these indicators one by one (launched 
on 1.10):
   - P99 write latency
   
![image](https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/assets/52550727/baf5be4c-8c3d-414c-a40b-804477ea0737)
   
   It can be seen that the P99 write latency has significantly decreased from a 
peak of more than ten to twenty seconds to less than one second.
   
   - the standard deviation of journal disk write throughput
   
![image](https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/assets/52550727/a6d14360-49a9-4204-9005-c3f56688ce70)
   
   The peak standard deviation of journal disk write throughput has decreased 
from 25MB/s to 21MB/s.
   
   - the range of journal disk write throughput
   
![image](https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/assets/52550727/dabc7088-453b-4369-9141-5fc8f38f82c4)
   
   The peak write throughput range has decreased from 150MB/s to 130MB/s.
   
   - Journal disk write throughput top 10
   
![image](https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/assets/52550727/339e6ba9-9d19-4a14-8426-507d335a2602)
   
   There is also a significant decrease in the top 10 journal disk write 
throughput.
   
   
   Could you help to review this BP? @shoothzj @wenbingshen @eolivelli @dlg99 
@jiazhai 


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]

Reply via email to