kafka-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Himanshu Shukla <himanshushukla...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Producer-Perf-test
Date Tue, 03 Mar 2020 14:52:39 GMT
It's okay. You could probably take the screenshot and share it.

On Tue, 3 Mar 2020, 20:13 sunil chaudhari, <sunilmchaudhari05@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi Himanshu,
> Sorry but I pasted from excel. Dont know how it got messed up?
>
> Will resend it.
>
> On Tue, 3 Mar 2020 at 6:48 PM, Himanshu Shukla <
> himanshushukla254@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > could you please share the result in some proper way? Each field is line
> by
> > line.
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 3, 2020 at 2:43 PM Sunil CHAUDHARI
> > <sunilchaudhari@dbs.com.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > > I have done performance testing of Kafka cluster using
> > > kafka-producer-perf-test.sh
> > > I created diff type of topics and did perf testing. Example: MB1P1R= MB
> > is
> > > my topic name with 1 Partition and 1 replica.
> > > I have 3 nodes cluster.
> > >
> > > My Observations:
> > >
> > >   *   When I increased partitions, and keep replica same, then
> Throughput
> > > increases. Compare Row  1 and 2
> > >   *   Increase number of replica  and  partitions same: Throughput
> > > decreased than before. Row 2 and 3
> > >   *   Increase number of partitions and keep replica same as before: TP
> > > increased.  Row 3 and 4
> > >   *   Increase number of Replica and keep partitions same: TP
> decreased.
> > > Row 4 and 5.
> > >
> > > Question: Does it make any impact on throughput when number of
> partitions
> > > and replicas are equal?
> > >
> > > Sr NO
> > >
> > > Topic
> > >
> > > Partitions
> > >
> > > Replicas
> > >
> > > Network.threads
> > >
> > > IO-Threads
> > >
> > > Records Sent
> > >
> > > Batch-size-avg
> > >
> > > Throughput
> > >
> > > Latency (ms)
> > >
> > > Records/sec
> > >
> > > Size/sec
> > >
> > > Avg
> > >
> > > Max
> > >
> > > 1
> > >
> > > MB1P1R
> > >
> > > 1
> > >
> > > 1
> > >
> > > 3
> > >
> > > 8
> > >
> > > 65495
> > >
> > > 16220
> > >
> > > 68653.03983
> > >
> > > 13.78 MB/sec
> > >
> > > 163.67
> > >
> > > 245
> > >
> > > 2
> > >
> > > MB2P1R
> > >
> > > 2
> > >
> > > 1
> > >
> > > 3
> > >
> > > 8
> > >
> > > 65495
> > >
> > > 15865.719
> > >
> > > 58269.57295
> > >
> > > 11.70 MB/sec
> > >
> > > 173.81
> > >
> > > 470
> > >
> > > 3
> > >
> > > MB2P2R
> > >
> > > 2
> > >
> > > 2
> > >
> > > 3
> > >
> > > 8
> > >
> > > 65495
> > >
> > > 16202.813
> > >
> > > 46286.21908
> > >
> > > 9.29 MB/sec
> > >
> > > 417.33
> > >
> > > 704
> > >
> > > 4
> > >
> > > MB3P2R
> > >
> > > 3
> > >
> > > 2
> > >
> > > 3
> > >
> > > 8
> > >
> > > 65495
> > >
> > > 16184
> > >
> > > 56412.57537
> > >
> > > 11.32 MB/sec
> > >
> > > 229.82
> > >
> > > 550
> > >
> > > 5
> > >
> > > MB3P3R
> > >
> > > 3
> > >
> > > 3
> > >
> > > 3
> > >
> > > 8
> > >
> > > 65495
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 46417.43444
> > >
> > > 9.32 MB/sec
> > >
> > > 411.44
> > >
> > > 705
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Sunil.
> > > CONFIDENTIAL NOTE:
> > > The information contained in this email is intended only for the use of
> > > the individual or entity named above and may contain information that
> is
> > > privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable
> law.
> > > If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are
> > hereby
> > > notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this
> > > communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message
> > in
> > > error, please immediately notify the sender and delete the mail. Thank
> > you.
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Himanshu Shukla
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message