3.8 KiB
| title |
|---|
| etcd v2.2.0-rc benchmarks |
Physical machines
GCE n1-highcpu-2 machine type
- 1x dedicated local SSD mounted under /var/lib/etcd
- 1x dedicated slow disk for the OS
- 1.8 GB memory
- 2x CPUs
etcd Cluster
3 etcd 2.2.0-rc members, each runs on a single machine.
Detailed versions:
etcd Version: 2.2.0-alpha.1+git
Git SHA: 59a5a7e
Go Version: go1.4.2
Go OS/Arch: linux/amd64
Also, we use 3 etcd 2.1.0 alpha-stage members to form cluster to get base performance. etcd's commit head is at c7146bd5, which is the same as the one that we use in etcd 2.1 benchmark.
Testing
Bootstrap another machine and use the hey HTTP benchmark tool to send requests to each etcd member. Check the benchmark hacking guide for detailed instructions.
Performance
reading one single key
| key size in bytes | number of clients | target etcd server | read QPS | 90th Percentile Latency (ms) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 64 | 1 | leader only | 2804 (-5%) | 0.4 (+0%) |
| 64 | 64 | leader only | 17816 (+0%) | 5.7 (-6%) |
| 64 | 256 | leader only | 18667 (-6%) | 20.4 (+2%) |
| 256 | 1 | leader only | 2181 (-15%) | 0.5 (+25%) |
| 256 | 64 | leader only | 17435 (-7%) | 6.0 (+9%) |
| 256 | 256 | leader only | 18180 (-8%) | 21.3 (+3%) |
| 64 | 64 | all servers | 46965 (-4%) | 2.1 (+0%) |
| 64 | 256 | all servers | 55286 (-6%) | 7.4 (+6%) |
| 256 | 64 | all servers | 46603 (-6%) | 2.1 (+5%) |
| 256 | 256 | all servers | 55291 (-6%) | 7.3 (+4%) |
writing one single key
| key size in bytes | number of clients | target etcd server | write QPS | 90th Percentile Latency (ms) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 64 | 1 | leader only | 76 (+22%) | 19.4 (-15%) |
| 64 | 64 | leader only | 2461 (+45%) | 31.8 (-32%) |
| 64 | 256 | leader only | 4275 (+1%) | 69.6 (-10%) |
| 256 | 1 | leader only | 64 (+20%) | 16.7 (-30%) |
| 256 | 64 | leader only | 2385 (+30%) | 31.5 (-19%) |
| 256 | 256 | leader only | 4353 (-3%) | 74.0 (+9%) |
| 64 | 64 | all servers | 2005 (+81%) | 49.8 (-55%) |
| 64 | 256 | all servers | 4868 (+35%) | 81.5 (-40%) |
| 256 | 64 | all servers | 1925 (+72%) | 47.7 (-59%) |
| 256 | 256 | all servers | 4975 (+36%) | 70.3 (-36%) |
performance changes explanation
-
read QPS in most scenarios is decreased by 5~8%. The reason is that etcd records store metrics for each store operation. The metrics is important for monitoring and debugging, so this is acceptable.
-
write QPS to leader is increased by 20~30%. This is because we decouple raft main loop and entry apply loop, which avoids them blocking each other.
-
write QPS to all servers is increased by 30~80% because follower could receive latest commit index earlier and commit proposals faster.