trafficserver-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Saraswathi Venkataraman <saraswathi.venkatara...@Xoriant.Com>
Subject RE: Cache configuration
Date Tue, 03 Jul 2012 12:11:41 GMT
This is the sample results we get for both the ATS.

For an average size of  objects fetched for 26K,ram cache config variable set to 100M and
ram cache cut off set to 100M for both these, we get for ATS1. Storage config has /dev/sda
for ATS2 and /dev/sdb for ATS1

TPS: 20910

BW: 4.34928

ATS1 CPU utiliation:

ATS1 server load:

Latency of ATS1 which is loaded
avr 0.76

Latency of the other idle ATS2(SSD)
avr 0.15

And for ATS2
TPS: 22324


ATS2 CPU utiliation 51.40%

AT2S server load 2.55

avr 0.715

Latenc of the AT1 which is idle
Avr 0.15

There is not much difference in the TPS as well. Is there any other way we can reduce the
latency, Am I missing some RAM configuration. Are there any other parameters  I can configure,
for better performance?

Thanks & Regards
Saraswathi Venkataraman | Xoriant Solutions Pvt. Ltd.
Winchester, Hiranandani Business Park, Powai, Mumbai 400076, INDIA.
Tel: +91 22 30511000 | Ext: 1113 |<>

From: Leif Hedstrom []
Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2012 8:25 AM
Cc: Saraswathi Venkataraman
Subject: Re: Cache configuration

On 6/29/12 12:52 AM, Saraswathi Venkataraman wrote:
I have an ATS which is connected to RAID5 and another ATS which is an SSD

These are the raw disk available on ATS1 AND ATS2 respectively.

Disk /dev/sda: 6301.1 GB, 6301058621440 bytes
Disk /dev/sdb: 900.2 GB, 900151926784 bytes

On ATS2:

Disk /dev/sda: 3584.5 GB, 3584534339584 bytes
Disk /dev/sdb: 512.1 GB, 512076636160 bytes

Nothing rings any bells, I'd expect the SSD to outperform the SSD by several magnitudes. :/

-- Leif

View raw message