Thanks Sijie. I will make some bench and report the results Enrico
Il Mar 9 Ago 2016 21:50 Sijie Guo <[email protected]> ha scritto: > In general, reading an entry from bookie is pretty fast as most of the > index pages will be cached in memory, so it typically only needs one disk > access. > > You might see evaluated latency when index pages begin swapping in and > out. So ideally I would suggest using small index page size and large > memory, so you can keep most of the index pages in memory. > > - Sijie > > On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 7:10 AM, Enrico Olivelli <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Hi BookKeepers, >> >> Recently JV explained how BookKeeper can support a long term >> low-latency data store. >> >> I'm working on a new project which need a fast replicated "object >> store" on local LAN, replication is needed only for high-availability. >> >> Usually the object (byte[]) size will be between 10KB and 10MB and >> typically they are kept only for a couple of days, for a medium total >> storage size of 700GB. >> >> My idea is to write these objects to BookKeeper and store the entry >> coordinates (ledgerId/offset) as a pointer to the object. >> >> My question is about random access reading from Bookies, can I hope to >> achieve low latency while reading a single entry from a ledger ? >> >> Both writes and reads will run concurrently with an high degree of >> parallelism (thousands of concurrent writes/reads) >> >> In my use case it is very likely that reads will be done on recently >> written data, so I think that the bookie cache would come to help >> >> What do you think ? >> > > -- -- Enrico Olivelli
