Thanks for the update, Andrew.
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 2:07 PM, Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org> wrote:
> Workload E tests on a new testbed instance with careful attention to
> configuration do not produce the same results. We have instead:
>
> *Workload E* - 0.98.4RC0
>
>
>
>
>
> [OVERALL] RunTime(ms)1270229 [OVERALL]Throughput(ops/sec)
> 7944[INSERT] Operations
> 499175 [INSERT]AverageLatency(us)
> 18[INSERT]MinLatency(us)
> 5[INSERT] MaxLatency(us)
> 571160 [INSERT]95thPercentileLatency(ms)
> 0[INSERT] 99thPercentileLatency(ms)
> 0 [SCAN]Operations
> 9500825[SCAN]AverageLatency(us)
>
>
> 21089[SCAN] MinLatency(us)
> 772 [SCAN]MaxLatency(us)
> 3300020[SCAN]95thPercentileLatency(ms)
> 107[SCAN] 99thPercentileLatency(ms)
> 152
>
> I ran workload E a few times to insure the results were consistent. They
> vary a bit due to natural variance but not by 23%.
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 5:08 PM, Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Comparing the relative performance of 0.98.4 RC0 and 0.98.0 on Hadoop
> > 2.2.0 using YCSB.
> >
> > This will be the last report of these from me for a while, as I will be
> > losing my current access to EC2 resources tomorrow.
> >
> > 5 concurrent YCSB clients on 5 servers target 100,000 ops/second in
> > aggregate. Reported average values are averages of readings from all
> > clients over 3 runs. Min values are the minimum reported by any client on
> > any run. Max and percentile values are the maximum reported by any client
> > on any run. What is interesting is relative differences, because each EC2
> > testbed has a varying baseline. 0.98.0 and 0.98.4 tests were run on the
> > same instance set.
> >
> > These tests were run with no security coprocessors installed, using HFile
> > V2. The workload E results are a concern. *It appears we have a 23%
> > decline in measured scan throughput and an 23% increase in average op
> time
> > from 27 ms to 35 ms. *This does not correspond to any active security
> > feature (though that could worsen results potentially, untested) so is
> > something changed in core code. Other workloads are not affected so this
> is
> > something specific to scanning. Perhaps delete tracking.
> >
> >
> > *Hardware and Versions*
> >
> > Hadoop 2.2.0
> >
> > HBase 0.98.0-hadoop2 + HBASE-11277
> >
> > HBase 0.98.4-hadoop2 RC0
> >
> > YCSB 1.0.4
> >
> >
> > 11x EC2 c3.8xlarge: 1 master, 5 slaves, 5 test clients
> >
> > 32 cores
> >
> > 60 GB RAM
> >
> > 2 x 320 GB directly attached SSD
> >
> > NameNode: 4 GB heap
> >
> > DataNode: 1 GB heap
> >
> > Master: 1 GB heap
> >
> > RegionServer: 8 GB heap, 24 GB bucket cache offheap engine
> >
> >
> > *Methodology*
> >
> >
> > Setup:
> >
> > 0. Start cluster
> > 1. shell: create "seed", { NAME=>"u", COMPRESSION=>"snappy" }
> > 2. YCSB: Preload 100 million rows into table "seed"
> > 3. shell: flush "seed" ; compact "seed"
> > 4. Wait for compaction to complete
> > 5. shell: create_snapshot "seed", "seed_snap"
> > 6. shell: disable "seed"
> >
> >
> > For each test:
> >
> > 7. shell: clone_snapshot "seed_snap", "test"
> > 8. YCSB: On each client (5 clients), run test -p
> > operationcount=2000000 -threads 20 -target 20000
> > 9. shell: disable "test"
> > 10. shell: drop "test"
> >
> >
> >
> > *Workload A*
> > *0.98.0* *0.98.4*
> >
> >
> >
> > [OVERALL] RunTime(ms) 100743 100693 [OVERALL] Throughput(ops/sec) 99263
> > 99312 [UPDATE] Operations 4997918 4999620 [UPDATE] AverageLatency(us)
> > 633 647 [UPDATE] MinLatency(us) 269 268 [UPDATE] MaxLatency(us) 1450432
> > 713191 [UPDATE] 95thPercentileLatency(ms) 0 0 [UPDATE]
> > 99thPercentileLatency(ms) 5 4 [READ] Operations 5002242 5000540 [READ]
> > AverageLatency(us) 151 144 [READ] MinLatency(us) 0 0 [READ]
> > MaxLatency(us) 1104157 952392 [READ] 95thPercentileLatency(ms) 0 0
> > [READ] 99thPercentileLatency(ms) 0 0
> >
> >
> >
> > *Workload B*
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [OVERALL] RunTime(ms) 100465 100458 [OVERALL] Throughput(ops/sec) 99537
> > 99544 [UPDATE] Operations 9499627 9499891 [UPDATE] AverageLatency(us)
> > 556 589 [UPDATE] MinLatency(us) 268 264 [UPDATE] MaxLatency(us) 709604
> > 695863 [UPDATE] 95thPercentileLatency(ms) 0 0 [UPDATE]
> > 99thPercentileLatency(ms) 1 2 [READ] Operations 500533 500269 [READ]
> > AverageLatency(us) 147 144 [READ] MinLatency(us) 0 0 [READ]
> > MaxLatency(us) 571294 495148 [READ] 95thPercentileLatency(ms) 0 0
> [READ]
> > 99thPercentileLatency(ms) 0 0
> >
> >
> >
> > *Workload C*
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [OVERALL] RunTime(ms) 100091 100022 [OVERALL] Throughput(ops/sec) 99909
> > 99978 [READ] Operations 9916831 10000000 [READ] AverageLatency(us) 524
> > 526 [READ] MinLatency(us) 273 269 [READ] MaxLatency(us) 737108 741634
> > [READ] 95thPercentileLatency(ms) 0 0 [READ] 99thPercentileLatency(ms) 1
> 2
> >
> >
> >
> > *Workload D*
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [OVERALL] RunTime(ms) 114244 103308 [OVERALL] Throughput(ops/sec) 89114
> > 96809 [INSERT] Operations 9499965 9500306 [INSERT] AverageLatency(us)
> > 1145 668 [INSERT] MinLatency(us) 270 271 [INSERT] MaxLatency(us)
> 4598999
> > 3291540 [INSERT] 95thPercentileLatency(ms) 6 1 [INSERT]
> > 99thPercentileLatency(ms) 13 3 [READ] Operations 500035 499694 [READ]
> > AverageLatency(us) 14 15 [READ] MinLatency(us) 4 4 [READ]
> MaxLatency(us)
> > 494730 495198 [READ] 95thPercentileLatency(ms) 0 0 [READ]
> > 99thPercentileLatency(ms) 0 0
> >
> >
> >
> > *Workload E*
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [OVERALL] RunTime(ms) 1600910 2078826 [OVERALL] Throughput(ops/sec)
> 6308
> > 4835 [INSERT] Operations 499131 500322 [INSERT] AverageLatency(us) 14
> 17
> > [INSERT] MinLatency(us) 5 5 [INSERT] MaxLatency(us) 506079 564468
> > [INSERT] 95thPercentileLatency(ms) 0 0 [INSERT]
> 99thPercentileLatency(ms)
> > 0 0 [SCAN] Operations 9500869 9499678 [SCAN] AverageLatency(us)
> >
> >
> > 26636 34620 [SCAN] MinLatency(us) 746 755 [SCAN] MaxLatency(us) 8067864
> > 4615914 [SCAN] 95thPercentileLatency(ms) 117 136 [SCAN]
> > 99thPercentileLatency(ms) 169 187
> >
> >
> >
> > *Workload F*
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [OVERALL] RunTime(ms) 100876 100820 [OVERALL] Throughput(ops/sec) 99133
> > 99187 [UPDATE] Operations 10000000 10000000 [UPDATE] AverageLatency(us)
> > 737 746 [UPDATE] MinLatency(us) 273 272 [UPDATE] MaxLatency(us) 759812
> > 747124 [UPDATE] 95thPercentileLatency(ms) 1 1 [UPDATE]
> > 99thPercentileLatency(ms) 5 6 [READ-MODIFY-WRITE] Operations 5000370
> > 5000082 [READ-MODIFY-WRITE] AverageLatency(us) 742 750
> > [READ-MODIFY-WRITE] MinLatency(us) 280 279 [READ-MODIFY-WRITE]
> > MaxLatency(us) 756180 747197 [READ-MODIFY-WRITE]
> > 95thPercentileLatency(ms) 1 1 [READ-MODIFY-WRITE]
> > 99thPercentileLatency(ms) 5 6 [READ] Operations 5000530 5000242 [READ]
> > AverageLatency(us) 22 17 [READ] MinLatency(us) 0 0 [READ]
> MaxLatency(us)
> > 1551953 1097394 [READ] 95thPercentileLatency(ms) 0 0 [READ]
> > 99thPercentileLatency(ms) 0 0
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> >
> > - Andy
> >
> > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
> > (via Tom White)
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
>
> - Andy
>
> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
> (via Tom White)
>
