Hello all, For our project we need a distributed database with transactional support, and Ignite is one of the options we are testing.
Scalability is one of our must have, so we created an Ignite Kubernetes cluster in Azure to test it, but we found that the results were not what we expected. To discard the problem was in our code or in using transactional caches, we created a small test program for writing/reading 1.8M keys of 528 bytes each (it represents one of our data types). As you can see in this graph, reading doesn't seem to scale. Especially for the transactional cache, where having 4, 8 or 16 nodes in the cluster performs worse than having only 2: <http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/file/t3059/reading.png> While writing in atomic caches does... until 8 nodes, then it gets steady (No transactional times because of this <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14076> ): <http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/file/t3059/writing.png> Another strange thing is that, for atomic caches, reading seems to be slower than writing: <http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/file/t3059/atomic.png> So, my questions are: - Could I been doing something wrong that could lead to this results? - How could it be possible to get worse reading timings in a 4/8/16 nodes cluster than in a 2 nodes cluster for a transactional cache? - How could reading be slower than writing in atomic caches? These are the source code and configuration files we're using: Test.cpp <http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/file/t3059/Test.cpp> Order.h <http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/file/t3059/Order.h> node-configuration.xml <http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/file/t3059/node-configuration.xml> Best regards and thanks in advance! -- Sent from: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/
