Re: What changes have improved the performance between v2.0.1 and v2.1.0? #fabric #hyperledger-fabric
|
Brett T Logan <brett.t.logan@...>
Yoojin,
There a many things that influence performance of a network, some things to consider are:
How many times have you executed the performance test? Were they executed on a common host, i.e. were all components on the same host? Were they executed on a shared environment, i.e., was the network running on a non-dedicated cloud system, or was it running in a non-dedicated kubernetes environment and was the proper anti-affinity applied to ensure overcrowding didn't occur? Are the hosts co-located with local storage? Were you communicating on internal private vlans or external through the internet? When you moved from 2.0 to 2.1, did you ensure the components launch on the same hosts (did VM1 contain peer1 in 2.0 and did VM1 also contain peer1 in 2.1)?
Senthil, have you seen this in your performance testing? I took a look at the system test performance benchmarking, and at best I can say its inconclusive. There isn't a wide enough range to say the variation is enough to warrant saying this occurred. We've even on occasion recorded very small swings in the opposing direction where 2.1 performs ever so slightly slower than 2.0.
The takeaway from this is, there are a million factors that influence the performance of the network, the key to performance testing is repeatability, for every variation in the test setup, it takes time (and lots of log analysis) to say for sure what caused the variation in the results.
----- Original message -----
|
|
|
