Skip to content
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

fix(scale-cluster): Reduce load by 75% #7040

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 1, 2024
Merged

Conversation

roydahan
Copy link
Contributor

Current load with the very large blob being used in this test is too heavy for the i3.large nodes and disk can't handle the load.

Reducing the load by 75% reduced the throughput only by 10%, Now compaction bandwidth is around 200MB/s compared to almost 8GB/s previosuly.

We can probably push more, but it's not the intention of the test.

Testing

  • [ ]

PR pre-checks (self review)

  • I added the relevant backport labels
  • I didn't leave commented-out/debugging code

Reminders

  • Add New configuration option and document them (in sdcm/sct_config.py)
  • Add unit tests to cover my changes (under unit-test/ folder)
  • Update the Readme/doc folder relevent to this change (if needed)

Current load with the very large blob being used in this test is
too heavy for the i3.large nodes and disk can't handle the load.

Reducing the load by 75% reduced the throughput only by 10%,
Now compaction bandwidth is around 200MB/s compared to almost 8GB/s previosuly.

We can probably push more, but it's not the intention of the test.

Another small change is fixing the initial number of node, the base
scale test is called 15-to-25, so adjusted accordingly.
@roydahan roydahan requested a review from fruch December 31, 2023 18:12
@roydahan roydahan added backport/2024.1 Need backport to 2024.1 backport/5.4 Need backport to 5.4 labels Dec 31, 2023
@fruch
Copy link
Contributor

fruch commented Dec 31, 2023

@roydahan
you had any runs you did with those ?

@roydahan
Copy link
Contributor Author

roydahan commented Jan 1, 2024

Yes, had run in 2024.1 reproducers.

@fruch
Copy link
Contributor

fruch commented Jan 1, 2024

Please backport only to 2024.1
And we'll sync other branches

Copy link
Contributor

@fruch fruch left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Lgtm

@fruch fruch merged commit eeba607 into scylladb:master Jan 1, 2024
5 checks passed
@fruch fruch added backport/2024.1-done Commit backported to 2024.1 backport/5.4-done Commit backported to 5.4 labels Jan 1, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
backport/5.4-done Commit backported to 5.4 backport/5.4 Need backport to 5.4 backport/2024.1-done Commit backported to 2024.1 backport/2024.1 Need backport to 2024.1
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants