Hi, On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 9:06 PM dormando <dorma...@rydia.net> wrote:
> memtier is trash. Check the README for mc-crusher, I just updated it a bit > a day or two ago. Those numbers are incredibly low, I'd have to dig a > laptop out of the 90's to get something to perform that badly. > > mc-crusher runs blindly and you use the other utilities that come with it > to find command rates and sample the latency while the benchmark runs. > Almost all 3rd party memcached benchmarks end up benchmarking the > benchmark tool, not the server. I know mc-crusher doesn't make it very > obvious how to use though, sorry. > What I miss to find so far is how to get the statistics after a run. For example, I run ./mc-crusher --conf ./conf/asciiconf --ip 192.168.1.43 --port 12345 --timeout 10 and the output is: -------------------------------------------------------------- ip address default: 192.168.1.43 port default: 12345 id 0 for key send value ascii_get id 1 for key recv value blind_read id 5 for key conns value 50 id 8 for key key_prefix value foobar id 26 for key key_prealloc value 0 id 24 for key pipelines value 8 id 0 for key send value ascii_set id 1 for key recv value blind_read id 5 for key conns value 10 id 8 for key key_prefix value foobar id 26 for key key_prealloc value 0 id 24 for key pipelines value 4 id 19 for key stop_after value 200000 id 3 for key usleep value 1000 id 12 for key value_size value 10 setting a timeout done initializing timed run complete -------------------------------------------------------------- And I see that the server is busy at that time. How to find out how many sets/gets/... were made ? Martin > > A really quick untuned test against my raspberry pi 3 nets 92,000 > gets/sec. (mc-crusher running on a different machine). On a xeon machine > I can get tens of millions of ops/sec depending on the read/write ratio. > > On Thu, 19 Mar 2020, Martin Grigorov wrote: > > > Hi > > > > I've made some local performance testing > > > > First I tried with https://github.com/memcached/mc-crusher but it seems > it doesn't calculate any statistics after the load runs. > > > > The results below are from > https://github.com/RedisLabs/memtier_benchmark > > > > 1) Text > > ./memtier_benchmark --server XYZ --port 12345 -P memcache_text > > > > ARM64 text > > ========================================================================= > > Type Ops/sec Hits/sec Misses/sec Latency KB/sec > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Sets 985.28 --- --- 20.02700 67.22 > > Gets 9842.00 0.00 9842.00 20.01900 248.83 > > Waits 0.00 --- --- 0.00000 --- > > Totals 10827.28 0.00 9842.00 20.02000 316.05 > > > > > > X86 text > > ========================================================================= > > Type Ops/sec Hits/sec Misses/sec Latency KB/sec > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Sets 931.04 --- --- 20.06800 63.52 > > Gets 9300.21 0.00 9300.21 20.32600 235.13 > > Waits 0.00 --- --- 0.00000 --- > > Totals 10231.26 0.00 9300.21 20.30200 298.66 > > > > > > > > 2) Binary > > ./memtier_benchmark --server XYZ --port 12345 -P memcache_binary > > > > ARM64 binary > > ========================================================================= > > Type Ops/sec Hits/sec Misses/sec Latency KB/sec > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Sets 829.68 --- --- 23.46500 63.90 > > Gets 8287.69 0.00 8287.69 23.56100 314.75 > > Waits 0.00 --- --- 0.00000 --- > > Totals 9117.37 0.00 8287.69 23.55200 378.65 > > > > X86 binary > > ========================================================================= > > Type Ops/sec Hits/sec Misses/sec Latency KB/sec > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Sets 829.32 --- --- 23.63600 63.87 > > Gets 8284.10 0.00 8284.10 23.58600 314.61 > > Waits 0.00 --- --- 0.00000 --- > > Totals 9113.42 0.00 8284.10 23.59100 378.48 > > > > > > > > Text is faster on the ARM64. Binary is similar for both. > > > > The benchmarking tool runs on different machine than the ones running > Memcached: > > > > The ARM64 server has this spec: > > > > $ lscpu > > Architecture: aarch64 > > Byte Order: Little Endian > > CPU(s): 4 > > On-line CPU(s) list: 0-3 > > Thread(s) per core: 1 > > Core(s) per socket: 4 > > Socket(s): 1 > > NUMA node(s): 1 > > Vendor ID: 0x48 > > Model: 0 > > Stepping: 0x1 > > BogoMIPS: 200.00 > > L1d cache: 64K > > L1i cache: 64K > > L2 cache: 512K > > L3 cache: 32768K > > NUMA node0 CPU(s): 0-3 > > Flags: fp asimd evtstrm aes pmull sha1 sha2 crc32 atomics > fphp asimdhp cpuid asimdrdm jscvt fcma dcpop asimddp asimdfhm > > > > > > The x64 one: > > Architecture: x86_64 > > CPU op-mode(s): 32-bit, 64-bit > > Byte Order: Little Endian > > CPU(s): 4 > > On-line CPU(s) list: 0-3 > > Thread(s) per core: 2 > > Core(s) per socket: 2 > > Socket(s): 1 > > NUMA node(s): 1 > > Vendor ID: GenuineIntel > > CPU family: 6 > > Model: 85 > > Model name: Intel(R) Xeon(R) Gold 6266C CPU @ 3.00GHz > > Stepping: 7 > > CPU MHz: 3000.000 > > BogoMIPS: 6000.00 > > Hypervisor vendor: KVM > > Virtualization type: full > > L1d cache: 32K > > L1i cache: 32K > > L2 cache: 1024K > > L3 cache: 30976K > > NUMA node0 CPU(s): 0-3 > > Flags: fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr > pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht syscall nx pdpe1gb > rdtscp lm > > constant_tsc rep_good nopl xtopology nonstop_tsc cpuid tsc_known_freq > pni pclmulqdq ssse3 fma cx16 pcid sse4_1 sse4_2 x2apic movbe popcnt > > tsc_deadline_timer aes xsave avx f16c rdrand hypervisor lahf_lm abm > 3dnowprefetch invpcid_single ssbd ibrs ibpb stibp ibrs_enhanced fsgsbase > tsc_adjust > > bmi1 hle avx2 smep bmi2 erms invpcid rtm mpx avx512f avx512dq rdseed adx > smap clflushopt clwb avx512cd avx512bw avx512vl xsaveopt xsavec xgetbv1 arat > > avx512_vnni md_clear flush_l1d arch_capabilities > > > > Both with 16GB RAM. > > > > > > Regards, > > Martin > > > > On Mon, Mar 9, 2020 at 11:23 AM Martin Grigorov < > martin.grigo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Dormando, > > > > On Mon, Mar 9, 2020 at 9:19 AM Martin Grigorov < > martin.grigo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Dormando, > > > > On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 10:15 PM dormando <dorma...@rydia.net> wrote: > > Yo, > > > > Just to add in: yes we support ARM64. Though my build test > platform is a > > raspberry pi 3 and I haven't done any serious performance work. > packet.net > > had an arm test platform program but I wasn't able to get time to > do any > > work. > > > > From what I hear it does seem to perform fine on high end ARM64 > platforms, > > I just can't do any specific perf work unless someone donates > hardware. > > > > > > I will talk with my managers! > > I think it should not be a problem to give you a SSH access to one of > our machines. > > What specs do you prefer ? CPU, disks, RAM, network, ... > > VM or bare metal ? > > Preferred Linux flavor ? > > > > It would be good to compare it against whatever AMD64 instance you have. > Or I can also ask for two similar VMs - ARM64 and AMD64. > > > > > > My manager confirmed that we can give you access to an ARM64 machine. VM > would be easier to setup but bare metal is also possible. > > Please tell me the specs you prefer. > > We can give you access only temporarily though, i.e. we will have to > shut it down after you finish the testing, so it doesn't stay idle and waste > > budget. Later if you need it we can allocate it again. > > Would this work for you ? > > > > Martin > > > > > > > > Martin > > > > > > -Dormando > > > > On Fri, 6 Mar 2020, Martin Grigorov wrote: > > > > > Hi Emilio, > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 9:14 AM Emilio Fernandes < > emilio.fernande...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Thank you for sharing your experience, Martin! > > > I've played for few days with Memcached on our ARM64 test > servers and so far I also didn't face any issues. > > > > > > Do you know of any performance benchmarks of Memcached on AMD64 > and ARM64 ? Or at least of a performance test suite that I can > > run myself ? > > > > > > > > > I am not aware of any public benchmark results for Memcached on > AMD64 vs ARM64. > > > But quick search in Google returned these promising results: > > > 1) https://github.com/memcached/mc-crusher > > > 2) https://github.com/scylladb/seastar/wiki/Memcached-Benchmark > > > 3) https://github.com/RedisLabs/memtier_benchmark > > > 4) http://www.lmdb.tech/bench/memcache/ > > > > > > I will try some of them next week and report back! > > > > > > Martin > > > > > > > > > Gracias! > > > Emilio > > > > > > сряда, 4 март 2020 г., 16:30:37 UTC+2, Martin Grigorov написа: > > > Hello Emilio! > > > Welcome to this community! > > > > > > I am a regular user of Memcached and I can say that it works > just fine for us on ARM64! > > > We are still at early testing stage but so far so good! > > > > > > I like the idea to have this mentioned on the website! > > > It will bring confidence to more users! > > > > > > Regards, > > > Martin > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 4:09 PM Emilio Fernandes < > emilio.f...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hello Memcached community! > > > I'd like to know whether ARM64 architecture is officially > supported ? > > > I've seen that Memcached is being tested on ARM64 at Travis but > I do not see anything on the website or in GitHub Wiki > > explicitly saying > > > whether it is officially supported or not. > > > > > > Gracias! > > > Emilio > > > > > > -- > > > > > > --- > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the > Google Groups "memcached" group. > > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from > it, send an email to memc...@googlegroups.com. > > > To view this discussion on the web visit > > > > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/memcached/bb39d899-643b-4901-8188-a11138c37b82%40googlegroups.com > . > > > > > > -- > > > > > > --- > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the > Google Groups "memcached" group. > > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from > it, send an email to memcached+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > > > To view this discussion on the web visit > > > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/memcached/568921e6-0e29-4830-94be-355d1dbdab26%40googlegroups.com > . > > > > > > -- > > > > > > --- > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the > Google Groups "memcached" group. > > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from > it, send an email to memcached+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > > > To view this discussion on the web visit > > > > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/memcached/CAMomwMpu%2BOcwRBhzn7_PMLe9c6_sau-wNmMTyoBGhrL1L9XTBQ%40mail.gmail.com > . > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > --- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "memcached" group. > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, > send an email to memcached+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/memcached/alpine.DEB.2.21.2003061214140.25120%40dskull > . > > > > -- > > > > --- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "memcached" group. > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send > an email to memcached+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > > To view this discussion on the web visit > > > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/memcached/CAMomwMqhBnOpyBf1JvEsdK2V0VGZkKH0D5OhxV9uS6-_%2B1AsyA%40mail.gmail.com > . > > > > > > -- > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "memcached" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to memcached+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/memcached/alpine.DEB.2.21.2003191154040.6707%40dskull > . > -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "memcached" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to memcached+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/memcached/CAMomwMqoB_3vyUjr_4Yw8rTJMCkunROmLveuoSjeLUQtjVfjeA%40mail.gmail.com.
