Re: [ceph-users] keyvaluestore backend metadata overhead

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Although I still have some confusing, it's glad to see more attempts.
More test results  are welcomed!

On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 12:08 AM, Chris Pacejo <cpacejo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 10:52 AM, Haomai Wang <haomaiwang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> It's really a surprise that you impl a MySQL backend. Could I know the
>> purpose? Because it may not fit with keyvaluestore I think.
>
> We've found it to perform better (in isolation) than LevelDB.  We were
> able to map KeyValueDB's interface to it fairly painlessly, and I
> believe correctly.  (The only major catch was that we needed to buffer
> operations within a transaction and execute them all at once on
> submit, to prevent MySQL unnecessarily holding locks for the duration
> of long-lived transactions.)
>
>
>> You can simply calculate the sum of submit_transaction_sync consuming
>> time, it would be the multiple of the op thread number.
>
> I will try this, thanks.



-- 
Best Regards,

Wheat
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [CEPH Users]     [Ceph Large]     [Information on CEPH]     [Linux BTRFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]
  Powered by Linux