-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.7k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
store: write benchmarks /store and /store/v2 with different load scenarios #10297
Comments
Looking forward to seeing these results! |
The idea is to test the
And in the benchmark let's use the tm-db with go-leveldb (the default one) in store/v1 and badger in store/v2, and also rocksdb for both. Goal: we will run this benchmark on
|
Hi @robert-zaremba, I'm working on this right now. |
We want to test store as it's used by msg server. Moreover having different scenarios will let us know more about bottlenecks and performance characteristic. |
I've been running @Muggle-Du 's benchmarks and adapted them to use the DB backend by itself. So far it's clear that the
For now I don't see an easy way to improve Rocks and still have transactional semantics, and even without transactions Rocks is also slower than Badger overall, so we'll just stick to Badger for now and look at how to improve the store and algorithms. |
Thanks @roysc for starting looking at it. I propose to create a new issue where we will analyze the roots of inefficiencies and benchmark improvements. |
New issue created at #11328 |
Summary
We need to write benchmarks that use the store package and can help discern performance differences in backends.
Problem Definition
This feature will allow easy and more educated migrations between backends.
Proposal
Go through the usages of store/* and figure out the best benchmarks that use the package, and how to test them effectively test them out. /cc @cuonglm @robert-zaremba for our Thursday meeting discussion.
For Admin Use
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: