Why did you set the number of 1000 threads? Does it show to be the more performatic when threads = auto?
I have used stress tool in a larger test bed (10 nodes) and my optimal setup was 24 threads. To check this you must monitor the stress node, both the CPU and I/O. And give it a try with fewer threads. Lucas Benevides Ipea 2018-02-18 8:29 GMT-03:00 onmstester onmstester <onmstes...@zoho.com>: > I've configured a simple cluster using two PC with identical spec: > > cpu core i5 > RAM: 8GB ddr3 > Disk: 1TB 5400rpm > Network: 1 G (I've test it with iperf, it really is!) > > using the common configs described in many sites including datastax itself: > > cluster_name: 'MyCassandraCluster' > num_tokens: 256 > seed_provider: > - class_name: org.apache.cassandra.locator.SimpleSeedProvider > parameters: > - seeds: "192.168.1.1,192.168.1.2" > listen_address: > rpc_address: 0.0.0.0 > endpoint_snitch: GossipingPropertyFileSnitch > > Running stress tool: > > cassandra-stress write n=1000000 -rate threads=1000 -mode native cql3 -node > 192.168.1.1,192.168.1.2 > > Over each node it shows 39 K writes/seconds, but running the same stress > tool command on cluster of both nodes shows 45 K writes/seconds. I've done > all the tuning mentioned by apache and datastax. There are many use cases > on the net proving Cassandra linear Scalability So what is wrong with my > cluster? > > Sent using Zoho Mail <https://www.zoho.com/mail/> > > >
