mirror of
https://github.com/nspcc-dev/xk6-neofs.git
synced 2026-03-01 04:29:30 +00:00
Revise PUT load registry storage #29
Labels
No labels
I2
I3
I4
S2
S3
S4
U1
U2
U3
U4
blocked
bug
documentation
enhancement
enhancement
feature
go
help wanted
performance
question
No milestone
No project
No assignees
1 participant
Notifications
Due date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference
nspcc-dev/xk6-neofs#29
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue
No description provided.
Delete branch "%!s()"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Originally created by @carpawell on GitHub (Oct 4, 2023).
Expected Behavior
PUTing an object to NeoFS should do put an object to NeoFS not something else:
Current Behavior
Sometimes it is possible to get such results:
An average iteration exceeds NeoFS network part more than 4 times.
Possible Solution
Do not write objects to a local registry. See also how good an object generation is.
Steps to Reproduce (for bugs)
Just repeat and repeat and repeat load with a registry turned on and wait until
iteration_durationandneofs_obj_put_durationdiffers enough not to make results believable.Context
Sometimes PUT load may have extremely low speed and it does not seem like a NeoFS error: xk6 just does not provide a satisfying load.
NOTE: could be fixed in https://github.com/nspcc-dev/xk6-neofs/pull/67. Should be rechecked.
@carpawell commented on GitHub (Oct 4, 2023):
Maybe add some metrics that say what time registry operations take.
@roman-khimov commented on GitHub (Oct 4, 2023):
I have not looked at its internals, but it seems to me we need this registry for subsequent object fetching. But does it need to be stored anywhere or in-mem map will suffice is an open question to me.
@carpawell commented on GitHub (Oct 4, 2023):
Yes, it is needed only if we are PUTting and GETting objects at the same time. So we are testing a storage and using another storage for it with undefined (by default) i/o latency (from an object iteration point of view). So in-mem may look better, yes.