Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Optimize RDS resource allocations and database server configurations #35

Open
logstar opened this issue Sep 17, 2021 · 2 comments
Open
Assignees

Comments

@logstar
Copy link
Contributor

logstar commented Sep 17, 2021

When load testing API HTTP server (#27), profile RDS instance CPU, memory, and disk usages.

According to the profiling results, optimize the RDS CPU/memory/swap resource allocations and database server configurations, e.g. shared_buffers and work_mem, for the following purposes:

  • Concurrent queries are handled efficiently in maximum load scenario.
  • Memory is sufficient for handling maximum load scenario, so that disk is not used for unnecessary buffering.
  • Cost is reasonable.
@blackdenc
Copy link
Contributor

I think that the current configuration might be ok, but it's worth testing. This is a monitoring graph of the last 6 hours, after ETL. I'll run this same report later tonight after FNL has used the API for a while, and we can compare it to this baseline.
image

@logstar
Copy link
Contributor Author

logstar commented Sep 28, 2021

I think that the current configuration might be ok, but it's worth testing. This is a monitoring graph of the last 6 hours, after ETL. I'll run this same report later tonight after FNL has used the API for a while, and we can compare it to this baseline. image

Could you run load testing and record these metrics? In the last 6 hours, the API server was idling, so I think the metrics cannot be used to guide the RDS resource allocations and database server configurations.

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants