diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'content/documentation/design/benchmarks.md')
-rw-r--r-- | content/documentation/design/benchmarks.md | 4 |
1 files changed, 2 insertions, 2 deletions
diff --git a/content/documentation/design/benchmarks.md b/content/documentation/design/benchmarks.md index 7829de4..62e8480 100644 --- a/content/documentation/design/benchmarks.md +++ b/content/documentation/design/benchmarks.md @@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ We selected 5 standard endpoints that are often in the critical path: ListBucket In this first benchmark, we consider 5 instances that are located in a different place each. To simulate the distance, we configure mknet with a RTT between each node of 100 ms +/- 20 ms of jitter. We get the following graph, where the colored bars represent the mean latency while the error bars the minimum and maximum one: -![Comparison of endpoints latency for minio and garage](./img/endpoint-latency.png) +![Comparison of endpoints latency for minio and garage](../endpoint-latency.png) Compared to garage, minio latency drastically increases on 3 endpoints: GetObject, PutObject, RemoveObject. @@ -48,7 +48,7 @@ We consider that intra-DC communications are now very cheap with a latency of 0. The inter-DC remains costly with the same value as before (100ms +/- 20ms of jitter). We plot a similar graph as before: -![Comparison of endpoints latency for minio and garage with 6 nodes in 3 DC](./img/endpoint-latency-dc.png) +![Comparison of endpoints latency for minio and garage with 6 nodes in 3 DC](../endpoint-latency-dc.png) This new graph is very similar to the one before, neither minio or garage seems to benefit from this new topology, but they also do not suffer from it. |