Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Threaded View
Kafka >> mail # dev >> Re: Abou Kafka 0.8 producer throughput test


Copy link to this message
-
Re: Abou Kafka 0.8 producer throughput test
Looks like Jun's email didn't format the output properly. I've published
some preliminary producer throughput performance numbers on our performance
wiki -
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Performance+testing#Performancetesting-Producerthroughput

These tests measure producer throughput in the worst case scenario
(producer.num.acks=-1) i.e. max durability setting. The baseline with 0.7
would be to compare producer throughput with num.acks=0. We are working on
those tests now.

Thanks,
Neha
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 8:43 AM, Jun Rao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> We also did some perf test on 0.8 using the following command. All configs
> on the broker are the defaults.
> bin/kafka-run-class.sh kafka.perf.ProducerPerformance --broker-list
> localhost:9092 --initial-message-id 0 --messages 2000000 --topics topic_001
> --request-num-acks -1 --batch-size 100 --threads 1 --message-size 1024
> --compression-codec 0
>
> The following is our preliminary result. Could you try this on your
> environment? For replication factor larger than 1, we will try ack=1 and
> report the numbers later. It should provide better throughput. Thanks,
>
> *No. of Brokers = 1 / Replication Factor = 1 (Partition = 1)**Producer
> threads**comp**msg size**Acks**batch**Thru Put
> (MB/s)*101024-115.49201024-11
> 9.38501024-1116.611001024-1119.54101024-15025.72201024-15039.25501024-150
>
> 54.171001024-15056.71101024-110027.97201024-110045.05501024-110058.011001024
> -110059.82*No. of Brokers = 2 / Replication Factor = 2 (Partitions =
> 1)**Producer
> threads**comp**msg size**Acks**batch**Thru Put
> (MB/s)*101024-110.58201024-11
> 1.17501024-111.601001024-113.15101024-1507.48201024-15013.89501024-15018.11
> 1001024-15020.91101024-11008.72201024-110016.84501024-110020.661001024-1100
> 23.82*No. of Brokers = 3 / Replication Factor = 3 (Partitions =
> 1)**Producer
> threads**comp**msg size**Acks**batch**Thru Put
> (MB/s)*101024-110.53201024-11
> 0.94501024-111.721001024-112.78101024-1507.08201024-15013.40501024-15018.11
> 1001024-15021.01101024-11008.09201024-110014.88501024-110019.931001024-1100
> 23.22
> Thanks,
>
> Jun
>
> On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 8:33 PM, Jun Guo -X (jungu - CIIC at Cisco) <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >  Hi,****
> >
> >       I do producer(Kafka 0.8) throughput test many times. But the
> > average value is 3MB/S. Below is my test environment:****
> >
> >        CPU core      :16 ****
> >
> >        Vendor_id     :GenuineIntel****
> >
> >        Cpu family     :6****
> >
> >        Cpu MHz      :2899.999****
> >
> >        Cache size    :20480 KB****
> >
> >        Cpu level      :13****
> >
> >        MEM             :16330832KB=15.57GB****
> >
> >        Disk       : RAID5****
> >
> > ** **
> >
> >        I don’t know the detail information about the disk, such as
> > rotation. But I do some test about the I/O performance of the disk. The
> > write rate is 500MB~600MB/S, the read rate is 180MB/S. The detail is as
> > below. ****
> >
> > [image: cid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]6900]****
> >
> > ** **
> >
> > And I adjust the broker configuration file as the official document says
> > as below. And I adjust the JVM to 5120MB. ****
> >
> > I run producer performance test with the script
> > kafka-producer-perf-test.sh, with the test command is ****
> >
> > *bin/kafka-producer-perf-test.sh --broker-list 10.75.167.46:49092--topics
> topic_perf_46_1,topic_perf_46_2,topic_perf_46_3,topic_perf_46_4,
> > topic_perf_46_5,topic_perf_46_6,
> > topic_perf_46_7,topic_perf_46_8,topic_perf_46_9,topic_perf_46_10
> > --initial-message-id 0 --threads 200 --messages 1000000 --message-size
> 200
> > --compression-codec 1*
> >
> > ** **
> >
> > But the test result is also not as good as the official document
> > says(50MB/S, and that value in your paper is 100MB/S). The test result is
> > as below:****
> >
> > 2013-01-17 04:15:24:768, 2013-01-17 04:25:01:637, 0, 200, 200, 1907.35, *
> > 3.3064,* 10000000, 17334.9582****
> >
> > ** **
> >
> > On the other hand, I do consumer throughput test, the result is about