ALL COVERED TOPICS

NoSQL Benchmarks NoSQL use cases NoSQL Videos NoSQL Hybrid Solutions NoSQL Presentations Big Data Hadoop MapReduce Pig Hive Flume Oozie Sqoop HDFS ZooKeeper Cascading Cascalog BigTable Cassandra HBase Hypertable Couchbase CouchDB MongoDB OrientDB RavenDB Jackrabbit Terrastore Amazon DynamoDB Redis Riak Project Voldemort Tokyo Cabinet Kyoto Cabinet memcached Amazon SimpleDB Datomic MemcacheDB M/DB GT.M Amazon Dynamo Dynomite Mnesia Yahoo! PNUTS/Sherpa Neo4j InfoGrid Sones GraphDB InfiniteGraph AllegroGraph MarkLogic Clustrix CouchDB Case Studies MongoDB Case Studies NoSQL at Adobe NoSQL at Facebook NoSQL at Twitter

NAVIGATE MAIN CATEGORIES

Close
Monday, 18 April 2011
‹ Back

Multi-tenancy and Cloud Storage Performance

About:
,
,
,
,
,
,

Adrian Cockcroft[1] has a great explanation of the impact of multi-tenancy on cloud storage performance. The connection with NoSQL databases is not necessarily in the Amazon EBS and SSD Price, Performance, QoS comparison, but:

and

If you ever see public benchmarks of AWS that only use m1.small, they are useless, it shows that the people running the benchmark either didn’t know what they were doing or are deliberately trying to make some other system look better. You cannot expect to get consistent measurements of a system that has a very high probability of multi-tenant interference.

  1. Adrian Cockcroft: Netflix, @adrianco  ↩

Original title and link: Multi-tenancy and Cloud Storage Performance (NoSQL databases © myNoSQL)

via: http://perfcap.blogspot.com/2011/03/understanding-and-using-amazon-ebs.html