On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 7:45 PM, Brian Frank Cooper
wrote:
> One thing that is puzzling is the scan performance. The scan experiment is to
> scan between 1-100 records on each request. My 6 node Cassandra cluster is
> only getting up to about 230 operations/sec, compared to >1400 ops/sec for
> o
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 4:51 PM, Brian Frank Cooper
wrote:
> Yes, I had used the default 0.1.
>
> These boxes have 8 GB of RAM and I was giving 6 GB to the JVM (-Xmx). Does
> Cassandra do a read caching of data? It seems from the text in storage.conf
> that keys cache fraction refers only to inde
, February 05, 2010 2:07 PM
To: cassandra-user@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Cassandra versus HBase performance study
Great!
Are you using the default keys cache fraction of 0.01? If you have
the room on your JVM heap, I'd recommend 0.2 or more. (This will only
affect read perform
t; as update the paper; I just haven't gotten to it yet...
>
> Brian
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Ian Holsman [mailto:i...@holsman.net]
> Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 2:40 PM
> To: cassandra-user@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Cassandra versus HBase
on 0.5, as well as update
the paper; I just haven't gotten to it yet...
Brian
-Original Message-
From: Ian Holsman [mailto:i...@holsman.net]
Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 2:40 PM
To: cassandra-user@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Cassandra versus HBase performance study
Hi B
tencyLevel.ONE);
>
> Thanks!
>
> Brian
>
>
> From: Brian Frank Cooper
> Sent: Saturday, January 30, 2010 7:56 AM
> To: cassandra-user@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: RE: Cassandra versus HBase performance
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 9:45 PM, Brian Frank Cooper
wrote:
> We are using get_range_slice, and the AsciiType comparator. I'll try to run a
> test with BytesType; but how much difference do you expect?
Dunno. We really haven't done a lot with this; it's not even in our
stress test tool. Compacti
SlicePredicate(fieldlist,null);
> }
> ColumnParent parent = new ColumnParent("data", null);
>
> List results =
> client.get_range_slice(table,parent,predicate,startkey,"",recordcount,ConsistencyLevel.ONE);
>
> Thanks!
>
> Brian
>
> ___
dlist,null);
> }
> ColumnParent parent = new ColumnParent("data", null);
>
> List results =
> client.get_range_slice(table,parent,predicate,startkey,"",recordcount,ConsistencyLevel.ONE);
>
> Thanks!
>
> Brian
>
>
&
an Frank Cooper
Sent: Saturday, January 30, 2010 7:56 AM
To: cassandra-user@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: Cassandra versus HBase performance study
Good idea, we'll benchmark 0.5 next.
brian
-Original Message-
From: Jonathan Ellis [mailto:jbel...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, Januar
Good idea, we'll benchmark 0.5 next.
brian
-Original Message-
From: Jonathan Ellis [mailto:jbel...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, January 29, 2010 1:13 PM
To: cassandra-user@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Cassandra versus HBase performance study
Thanks for posting your results; it
It's also worth singling out CASSANDRA-675 for your "scale up"
scenario -- latency overhead per node is much lower in 0.5.
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 3:13 PM, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
> Thanks for posting your results; it is an interesting read and we are
> pleased to beat HBase in most workloads. :)
>
Thanks for posting your results; it is an interesting read and we are
pleased to beat HBase in most workloads. :)
Since you originally benchmarked 0.4.2, you might be interested in the
speed gains in 0.5. A couple graphs here:
http://spyced.blogspot.com/2010/01/cassandra-05.html
0.6 (beta in a f
13 matches
Mail list logo
