Each node had 8 cores (2.4GHz Xeon), 32GB RAM, SSD disks (I never saw IOWait, but was also focusing on ingestion rate). I always had 2 master nodes, and in addition tried the configurations 20, 10 and 5 data nodes. Running Elasticsearch 1.0.1 (but with Logstash 1.3.3)
-Robin- On 25 March 2014 06:17, Mark Walkom <[email protected]> wrote: > Can you elaborate what your cluster setup is like? > > Node specs (disk, RAM, CPU), how many master/data nodes and what version > of ES and java you're running? > > Regards, > Mark Walkom > > Infrastructure Engineer > Campaign Monitor > email: [email protected] > web: www.campaignmonitor.com > > > On 25 March 2014 16:11, Robin Clarke <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I did some intensive tests last week on a 20-node cluster and had the >> following insights - I'd be interested if anyone has similar/dissimilar >> experience. >> The had 20 nodes had 8 cores each, and 32GB memory each. I set up >> Elasticsearch to have 15GB of that memory. >> The sample events I was using were Apache logs (common format) without >> any additional fields (no geoip, useragent etc. plugins). >> When running as a 20-node cluster, I got a maximum igestion rate of 2500k >> events/minute (41k/second), *but* the bottleneck was the logstash CPU >> load... so I reduced to a 10 node cluster... >> With the 10 nodes I initially had 1600k/minute (27k) and acheived >> 1800k/minute (30k/second) by increasing index_refresh_interval to 30s and >> index_buffer_size to 20% >> Further reducing to 5 nodes, I had 1100k/minute (18k/second). >> This brings me to an interesting comparison: at 10 nodes, I have 3k >> events/second/node, and with 5 nodes I have 3.66k events/second/node. i.e. >> the overhead for doubling the number of nodes from 5 to 10 is about 20%. >> Is this to be expected? Just how scalable is Elasticsearch - at what >> point is the diminishing return on adding nodes not cost effective? >> Is the further logical reduction to 375 events/core/second still >> meaningful? >> >> Cheers, >> -Robin- >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "elasticsearch" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/3353dab5-6241-4b41-8845-6c5f8553d488%40googlegroups.com<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/3353dab5-6241-4b41-8845-6c5f8553d488%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the > Google Groups "elasticsearch" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/elasticsearch/muIKhFkrxFc/unsubscribe. > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to > [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/CAEM624b8a8ZZbOc81g18XZWNz3qYV3gby%3DCtGrPZ8f%2BwiXXYEg%40mail.gmail.com<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/CAEM624b8a8ZZbOc81g18XZWNz3qYV3gby%3DCtGrPZ8f%2BwiXXYEg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- Best winds, -Robin- ~:) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "elasticsearch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/CACX78vaf_r-GY6KVMk95R-jip-aMdr2y20-WwNL84jQe0PvD1Q%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
