Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on May 5, 2023. It is now read-only.

Strange performance issue with Storage #1230

Closed
jannone opened this issue Jun 10, 2014 · 3 comments
Closed

Strange performance issue with Storage #1230

jannone opened this issue Jun 10, 2014 · 3 comments
Assignees

Comments

@jannone
Copy link

jannone commented Jun 10, 2014

When running a simple script that responds an HTTP request with tableService.insertOrReplaceEntity, on a single core machine (Azure), my maximum throughput is just 48 req/sec, with the CPU at 10% (in other words, CPU is very idle).

When running the same script under node-cluster, in the same single core machine but now with 4 node processes, throughput reaches 134 req/sec.

Issue 1 - Is Azure SDK for node really 100% asynchronous? This data seems to indicate it is not, but I can't verify. node-cluster should not make a difference, since this is a single core machine.

Issue 2 - Even with node-cluster, throughput is too low, since the Azure documentation indicates a limit of 2000 entities per second in a single partition. Why?

#1230

@azuresdkci azuresdkci added the P4 label Aug 11, 2014
@azuresdkci azuresdkci changed the title Strange performance issue with Storage Duplicate item created by TFS bridge 120 Aug 11, 2014
@jannone
Copy link
Author

jannone commented Aug 11, 2014

Hey guys, sorry to bother, but what is the duplicate issue? Has this been fixed?

Thanks.

@andrerod andrerod reopened this Aug 11, 2014
@andrerod
Copy link

Wrong update. sorry :)

@andrerod andrerod changed the title Duplicate item created by TFS bridge 120 Strange performance issue with Storage Aug 11, 2014
@azuresdkci azuresdkci reopened this Aug 25, 2014
@amarzavery
Copy link
Contributor

Please try updated storage module azure-storage. If this perf issue continues please post the issue in the storage repo at https://github.com/Azure/azure-storage-node

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants