kafka-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Wes Chow <...@chartbeat.com>
Subject Re: HDD or SSD or EBS for kafka brokers in Amazon EC2
Date Tue, 02 Jun 2015 17:39:08 GMT

We have run d2 instances with Kafka. They're currently unstable -- 
Amazon confirmed a host issue with d2 instances that gets tickled by a 
Kafka workload yesterday. Otherwise, it seems the d2 instance type is 
ideal as it gets an enormous amount of disk throughput and you'll likely 
be network bottlenecked.

Wes


> Steven Wu <mailto:stevenz3wu@gmail.com>
> June 2, 2015 at 1:07 PM
> EBS (network attached storage) has got a lot better over the last a few
> years. we don't quite trust it for kafka workload.
>
> At Netflix, we were going with the new d2 instance type (HDD). our
> perf/load testing shows it satisfy our workload. SSD is better in latency
> curve but pretty comparable in terms of throughput. we can use the extra
> space from HDD for longer retention period.
>
> On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 9:37 AM, Henry Cai <hcai@pinterest.com.invalid>
>
> Henry Cai <mailto:hcai@pinterest.com.INVALID>
> June 2, 2015 at 12:37 PM
> We have been hosting kafka brokers in Amazon EC2 and we are using EBS
> disk. But periodically we were hit by long I/O wait time on EBS in some
> Availability Zones.
>
> We are thinking to change the instance types to a local HDD or local SSD.
> HDD is cheaper and bigger and seems quite fit for the Kafka use case which
> is mostly sequential read/write, but some early experiments show the HDD
> cannot catch up with the message producing speed since there are many
> topic/partitions on the broker which actually makes the disk I/O more
> randomly accessed.
>
> How are people's experience of choosing disk types on Amazon?
>

Mime
View raw message