The move to memcached_client 1.6.5 in Rails 2.3 seems to have made the Rails cache about 10x slower. Since that''s the opposite effect I would expect, I was hoping somebody would explain where I''m misreading these numbers? I noticed my fragment caching was slow -- it shouldn''t take 2ms just to read a 2k string from a localhost memcached server: Cached fragment hit: views/sightings/1556/row (2.3ms) Cached fragment hit: views/sightings/1557/row (2.4ms) Cached fragment hit: views/sightings/1558/row (2.2ms) Then i did some quick and dirty benchmarks on the console: First, with the "1.6.5" version bundled with rails 2.3 # => cache benchmark: (182.9ms) Then I switch memcache_client versions, to 1.5.0: # => cache benchmark: (18.6ms) (full benchmark code -- http://gist.github.com/94196) These numbers hold up on both OSX and Solaris. I''ll submit a ticket somewhere unless it turns out I''m missing something... --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 7:10 PM, whatcould <frayjusto-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> > The move to memcached_client 1.6.5 in Rails 2.3 seems to have made the > Rails cache about 10x slower. Since that''s the opposite effect I > would expect, I was hoping somebody would explain where I''m misreading > these numbers? > > I noticed my fragment caching was slow -- it shouldn''t take 2ms just > to read a 2k string from a localhost memcached server: > Cached fragment hit: views/sightings/1556/row (2.3ms) > Cached fragment hit: views/sightings/1557/row (2.4ms) > Cached fragment hit: views/sightings/1558/row (2.2ms) > > Then i did some quick and dirty benchmarks on the console: > > First, with the "1.6.5" version bundled with rails 2.3 > # => cache benchmark: (182.9ms) > > Then I switch memcache_client versions, to 1.5.0: > # => cache benchmark: (18.6ms) > > (full benchmark code -- http://gist.github.com/94196) > > These numbers hold up on both OSX and Solaris. I''ll submit a ticket > somewhere unless it turns out I''m missing something... >Can you post a complete test case that can be ran? -Conrad --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Hmm, good idea. There''s probably a better way to do this but here''s a test I ran in activesupport/test: http://gist.github.com/94481 (you still have to manually replace the memcache client in activesupport/vendor/, not sure how to easily swap out the MemCache client in code.) results: # ruby -Ilib:test test/memcache_client_test.rb Loaded suite test/memcache_client_test Started memcache_client version: 1.6.4.99 0.940000 0.390000 1.330000 ( 1.354539) . Finished in 1.374947 seconds. ========and switching memcache_client versions: ======== memcache_client version: 1.5.0 0.040000 0.020000 0.060000 ( 0.138320) . Finished in 0.15171 seconds. ============ There must be something I''m doing wrong -- I''m sure someone would have seen this if it were really this much slower?? --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
By the way -- I should clarify that the _actual memcache-client library_ is significantly faster, as the benchmarks included in the new (Mike Perham''s) branch of memcache-client show. http://github.com/mperham/memcache-client/tree Time to run the whole benchmark suite, on my oldish MacBook: 1.7.1: 49 seconds 1.6.4.99: 126 seconds 1.5: 376 seconds!! So it''s not the memcache-client itself. On Apr 13, 9:59 am, whatcould <da...-TfC9VCDmQu/2eFz/2MeuCQ@public.gmane.org> wrote:> Hmm, good idea. There''s probably a better way to do this but here''s a > test I ran in activesupport/test: > > http://gist.github.com/94481 > > (you still have to manually replace the memcache client in > activesupport/vendor/, not sure how to easily swap out the MemCache > client in code.) > > results: > > # ruby -Ilib:test test/memcache_client_test.rb > > Loaded suite test/memcache_client_test > Started > memcache_client version: 1.6.4.99 > 0.940000 0.390000 1.330000 ( 1.354539) > . > Finished in 1.374947 seconds. > > ========> and switching memcache_client versions: > ========> > memcache_client version: 1.5.0 > 0.040000 0.020000 0.060000 ( 0.138320) > . > Finished in 0.15171 seconds. > > ============> > There must be something I''m doing wrong -- I''m sure someone would have > seen this if it were really this much slower??--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Ok, on a tip from mperham:
Turning off the timeouts makes memcache in Rails 2.3 almost as fast as
it was in 2.2:
http://gist.github.com/94481
With timeouts:
memcache_client version: 1.6.4.99
9.170000 4.200000 13.370000 ( 13.567950)
.
No timeouts:
memcache_client version: 1.6.4.99
0.730000 0.230000 0.960000 ( 1.616430)
==
That would be something like this in your production.rb:
config.cache_store = :mem_cache_store, ''127.0.0.1:11211'', {
:timeout
=> nil }
==
But there''s still something fishy here -- in the mcache-client
benchmarks, 1.6.5 is significantly faster even without turning off the
timeouts. Doing some more research.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
I''ve added a FAQ entry explaining what is going on. 1.6+ is much faster than 1.5.0 only when multiple servers are being used. I''m guessing your benchmark is testing just localhost:11211. http://github.com/mperham/memcache-client/blob/d5ae15d362c379c3a6692e2d5b9beae545392cba/FAQ.rdoc Simple answer, turn off socket timeouts in order to dramatically speed up memcache-client but realize you might be woken up at 3am when production melts down, as I was. mike On Apr 12, 9:10 pm, whatcould <frayju...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> The move to memcached_client 1.6.5 in Rails 2.3 seems to have made the > Rails cache about 10x slower. Since that''s the opposite effect I > would expect, I was hoping somebody would explain where I''m misreading > these numbers? > > I noticed my fragment caching was slow -- it shouldn''t take 2ms just > to read a 2k string from a localhost memcached server: > Cached fragment hit: views/sightings/1556/row (2.3ms) > Cached fragment hit: views/sightings/1557/row (2.4ms) > Cached fragment hit: views/sightings/1558/row (2.2ms) > > Then i did some quick and dirty benchmarks on the console: > > First, with the "1.6.5" version bundled with rails 2.3 > # => cache benchmark: (182.9ms) > > Then I switch memcache_client versions, to 1.5.0: > # => cache benchmark: (18.6ms) > > (full benchmark code --http://gist.github.com/94196) > > These numbers hold up on both OSX and Solaris. I''ll submit a ticket > somewhere unless it turns out I''m missing something...--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
> Simple answer, turn off socket timeouts in order to dramatically speed > up memcache-client but realize you might be woken up at 3am when > production melts down, as I was.Better answer -- split the difference: install mike''s memcache- client-1.7.2 (from github) and the SystemTimer gem, which speeds up 1.6.5 substantially without turning off the timeouts. My problem is that I added fragment caching thinking .03ms fetch times were normal, and now when it takes 3-4ms (with the timeouts) to get each fragment... stuff gets really slow. So until i refactor, timeouts are off. david --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---