Improved performance with AWS Graviton2 instances on Amazon OpenSearch Service
Amazon OpenSearch Service is a fully managed service at AWS for OpenSearch. It’s an open-source search and analytics suite used for a broad set of use cases, like real-time application monitoring, log analytics, and website search.
While running an OpenSearch Service domain, you can choose from a variety of instances for your primary nodes and data nodes suitable for your workload: general purpose, compute optimized, memory optimized, or storage optimized. With the release of each new generation, Amazon OpenSearch Service has brought even better price performance.
Amazon OpenSearch Service now supports AWS Graviton2 instances: general purpose (M6g), compute optimized (C6g), memory optimized (R6g), and memory optimized with attached disk (R6gd). These instances offer up to a 38% improvement in indexing throughput, 50% reduction in indexing latency, and 40% improvement in query performance depending upon the instance family and size compared to the corresponding intel-based instances from the current generation (M5, C5, R5).
The AWS Graviton2 instance family includes several new performance optimizations, such as larger caches per core, higher Amazon Elastic Block Store (Amazon EBS) throughput than comparable x86 instances, fully encrypted RAM, and many others. You can benefit from these optimizations with minimal effort by provisioning or migrating your OpenSearch Service instances today.
Performance analysis compared to fifth-generation intel-based instances
We conducted tests using the AWS Graviton2 instances against the fifth-generation intel-based instances and measured performance improvements. Our setup included two six-node domains with three dedicated primary nodes and three data nodes and running Elasticsearch 7.10. For the intel-based setup, we used c5.xlarge for the primary nodes and r5.xlarge for the data nodes. Similarly on the AWS Graviton2-based setup, we used c6g.xlarge for the primary nodes and r6g.xlarge for the data nodes. Both domains were three Availability Zone enabled and VPC enabled, with advanced security and 512 GB of EBS volume attached to each node. Each index had six shards with a single replica.
The dataset contained 2,000 documents with a flat document structure. Each document had 20 fields: 1 date field, 16 text fields, 1 float field, and 2 long fields. Documents were generated on the fly using random samples so that the corpus was infinite.
For ingestion, we used a load generation host where each bulk request had a 4 MB payload (approximately 2,048 documents per request) and nine clients.
We used one query generation host with one client. We ran a mix of low-latency queries (approximately 10 milliseconds), medium-latency queries (100 milliseconds) , and high-latency queries (1,000 milliseconds):
- Low-latency queries – These were match-all queries.
- Medium-latency queries – These were multi-match queries or queries with filters based on one randomly selected keyword. The results where aggregated in a date histogram and sorted by the descending ingest timestamp.
- High-latency queries – These were multi-match queries or queries with filters based on five randomly selected keywords. The results were aggregated using two aggregations: aggregated in a date histogram with a 3-hour interval based on the ingest timestamp, and a date histogram with a 1-minute interval based on the ingest timestamp.
We ran 60 minutes of burn-in time followed by 3 hours of 90/10 ingest to query workloads with a mix of 20% low-latency, 50% medium-latency, and 30% high-latency queries. The amount of load sent to the clusters was identical.
Graphs and results
When ingesting documents at the same throughput, the AWS Graviton2 domain shows a much lower latency than the intel-based domain, as shown in the following graph. Even at p99 latency, the AWS Graviton2 domain is consistently lower than the p50 latency of the intel-based domains. In addition, AWS Graviton2 latencies are more consistent than intel-based instances, providing for a more predictable user experience.
When querying documents at the same throughput, the AWS Graviton2 domain outperforms the intel-based instances. The p50 latency of AWS Graviton2 is better than the p50 latency of intel-based.
Similarly, the p99 latency of AWS Graviton2 is better than that of the intel-based instances. Note in the following graph that the increase in latency over time is due to the growing corpus size.
As demonstrated in our performance analysis, the new AWS Graviton2-based instances consistently yield better performance compared to the fifth-generation intel-based instances. Try these new instances out and let us know how they perform for you!
As usual, let us know your feedback.
About the Authors
Rohin Bhargava is a Sr. Product Manager with the Amazon OpenSearch Service team. His passion at AWS is to help customers find the correct mix of AWS services to achieve success for their business goals.