Your suggested change has been received. Thank you.

close

Suggest A Change

https://thales.na.market.dpondemand.io/docs/dpod/services/kmo….

Thales Logo
back

Performance Summary

Google Calendar

search

Please Note:

Google Calendar

This section provides the performance summary of the Google Calendar service managed through CCKM on the CipherTrust Manager server.

Requests Per Second

The following sections list the wrap requests per second, approximate latency, and the number of virtual users for different deployment scenarios.

To provide a good user experience, Google recommends a maximum latency of 200 ms (for 99% of the requests). Therefore, the performance numbers on this page are based on a latency of around 200 ms.

Google Cloud

Server LocationClient Location
us-central1-aus-central1-a

Simulated the wrap requests for Google Calendar on the CipherTrust Manager deployed on Google Cloud Platform using the k6 tool. The following table shows the handled number of requests per second (RPS), with approximate latency, and the number of virtual users for different data samples on a standalone CipherTrust Manager and a two-node CipherTrust Manager cluster connected with a load balancer.

Click a tab to view performance numbers based on two different specifications.

System VolumeMemoryCPUsNICs
50 GB16 GB41

Click a tab to view performance numbers for a standalone CipherTrust Manager or a two-node cluster with a load balancer.

UsersLatency (in ms)Requests/Second
1022.1616.94002
2025.8733.700992
3029.1650.699
4035.6266.905176
5056.9582.709484
6083.3597.367296
7088.34111.414325
80152.05122.93235
90217.11131.68626
UsersLatency (in ms)Requests/Second
1032.7716.881907
2032.1833.502487
3031.5750.310974
4031.4366.667725
5034.3483.402285
6038.1699.260418
7043.62116.579842
8041.38132.414234
9045.06148.208134
10057.17163.706027
11065.06179.020356
12070.65193.417367
13087.36208.041638
140113.23219.618837
150132.55233.832527
160168.45242.416406
170201.35252.445798

Comparison Graphs

Specification 1: Standalone vs Two-Node Cluster with Load Balancer

System VolumeMemoryCPUsNICs
50 GB64 GB81

Click a tab to view performance numbers for a standalone CipherTrust Manager or a two-node cluster with a load balancer.

UsersLatency (in ms)Requests/Second
1015.217.169325
3018.7151.008778
5017.9585.034018
7019.99118.406895
9022.8151.867389
11029.53185.042165
13026.8218.012588
15050.45247.726422
17060.21277.771915
19082.69308.844717
21089.9336.886335
230110.77360.546328
250129.13386.616301
270186.98400.53527
290231.83415.022139
UsersLatency (in ms)Requests/Second
1024.8517.013772
3026.4250.594645
5024.3184.351819
7022.25117.585101
9023.81152.119166
11022.7184.904241
13024.46218.317553
15023.46251.799291
17026.11284.927543
19026.68319.168286
21027.68351.441629
23031.27382.913143
25033.07414.149236
27037.78445.583614
29037.54481.201628
31047.73509.962281
33050.11540.231395
35056.09568.691533
37064.05598.184122
39067.99629.559483
41095.98648.096876
43098.42677.029967
45098.73705.757959
470136.14722.192467
490138.81745.6667
510200.38749.703298

Comparison Graphs

Specification 2: Standalone vs Two-Node Cluster with Load Balancer

AWS Cloud

Server LocationClient Location
us-east-1bus-central1-a

Simulated the wrap requests for Google Calendar on the CipherTrust Manager deployed on AWS cloud using the k6 tool. The following table shows the handled number of requests per second (RPS), with approximate latency, and the number of virtual users for different data samples on a standalone CipherTrust Manager and a two-node CipherTrust Manager cluster connected with a load balancer.

Click a tab to view performance numbers based on two different specifications.

System VolumeMemoryCPUsNICs
50 GB16 GB41

Click a tab to view performance numbers for a standalone CipherTrust Manager or a two-node cluster with a load balancer.

UsersLatency (in ms)Requests/Second
1046.4516.187459
2045.3832.437778
3044.4348.449399
4045.5264.597006
5045.7680.851734
6050.0696.457289
7049.02112.148661
8071.87127.43983
9062.98142.926131
10076.5157.384469
11085.53172.640989
12088.88187.20207
130122.48198.203387
140125.95212.196902
150177.16220.655164
160196.31232.058391
170205.23242.47253
UsersLatency (in ms)Requests/Second
1043.3616.230968
2042.6932.307195
3042.6148.362801
4042.8364.588292
5043.1680.524303
6044.196.912002
7044.13112.44579
8044.23128.580249
9044.51144.772264
10045.4160.873428
11046.54176.926386
12047.14192.216205
13047.43208.636698
14048.2224.307708
15049.13240.141065
16050.57255.278072
17052.45271.01118
18053.04286.524106
19058.56301.984366
20059.01316.592678
21067.2329.969441
22075346.092386
23070.31361.216239
24051.34267.949072
25084.85357.444582
26086.07373.198369
270201.9360.15469
280101.04400.812771
290113.94409.21364
300125.16424.121674
310130.41432.858526
320169.18438.01894
330199.8449.49049
340224.4455.050062

Comparison Graphs

Specification 1: Standalone vs Two-Node Cluster with Load Balancer

System VolumeMemoryCPUsNICs
50 GB64 GB81

Click a tab to view performance numbers for a standalone CipherTrust Manager or a two-node cluster with a load balancer.

UsersLatency (in ms)Requests/Second
1039.7316.465342
3039.3248.614473
5038.9481.009533
7039.96113.01632
9038.93145.338532
11039.68177.809499
13041.22210.307813
15043.79242.919137
17045.37273.825955
19052.8304.935724
21057.28335.559065
23068.32365.948438
25081.12394.664553
27083.21423.025098
29095.12449.812886
310123.71471.120772
330149.41491.916512
350170.34514.60998
370214.64524.963419
UsersLatency (in ms)Requests/Second
1042.2516.137739
3041.0648.750214
5040.2380.995676
7038.96113.089121
9038.83145.603135
11038.94177.971337
13038.95211.891827
15039.14241.927469
17039.3276.144247
19039.4307.94167
21039.89339.423347
23041.6372.051267
25040.58403.209987
27040.85434.881269
29041.36468.022003
31041.67499.597171
33044.31532.419496
35043.46566.654822
37044.24596.071302
39046.57627.917302
41048.79657.741502
43048.53690.154749
45049.01721.60321
47052.92750.774548
49074.23775.226373
51056.06747.230233
53061.58776.806541
55058.52811.338109
57065.98839.637571
59062.12874.63542
61096.62884.402171
630108.16910.027679
65096.17942.927004
670122.17958.465024
690130.92981.462841
710140.051001.978077
730232.37968.938332

Comparison Graphs

Specification 2: Standalone vs Two-Node Cluster with Load Balancer

Physical Appliance

Server LocationClient Location
San Joseus-central1-a

CipherTrust Manager Configuration

System VolumeMemoryCPUsNICs
2 TB16 GB1 with 4 Cores1

Simulated the wrap requests for Google Calendar on the CipherTrust Manager deployed on a physical appliance using the k6 tool. The following table shows the handled number of requests per second (RPS), with approximate latency, and the number of virtual users for different data sample for three runs.

UsersLatency (in ms)Requests/Second
1073.3215.662693
2080.0530.946652
3086.7846.230611
4091.37561.377163
5095.9776.523715
60127.2889.6552465
70158.59102.786778
80183.955115.7833845
90209.32128.779991

Comparison Graphs

Physical Appliance vs AWS Cloud vs Google Cloud

Recommendations

Assumption

Each user has 3 documents open and is editing them resulting in an autosave every 30 seconds, that is, 3/30=0.1 transactions per second (tps) per user.

Number of users = (throughput for around 200 ms latency)/0.1

Google Cloud

  1. Response time compliance of around 200 ms was met for a maximum throughput of 131.69 operations per second with a standalone CipherTrust Manager k170v instance with 4 CPUs and 16 GB RAM.

    The approximate number of users this configuration can handle is 1317.

  2. Response time compliance of around 200 ms was met for a maximum throughput of 252.45 operations per second with a two-node CipherTrust Manager k170v cluster (each node with 4 CPUs and 16 GB RAM) connected with a Google Cloud load balancer.

    The approximate number of users this configuration can handle is 2525.

  3. Response time compliance of around 200 ms was met for a maximum throughput of 415.02 operations per second with a standalone CipherTrust Manager k470v instance with 8 CPUs and 64 GB RAM.

    The approximate number of users this configuration can handle is 4150.

  4. Response time compliance of around 200 ms was met for a maximum throughput of 749.70 operations per second with a two-node CipherTrust Manager k470v cluster (each node with 8 CPUs and 64 GB RAM) connected with a Google Cloud load balancer.

    The approximate number of users this configuration can handle is 7497.

AWS Cloud

  1. Response time compliance of around 200 ms was met for a maximum throughput of 242.47 operations per second with a standalone CipherTrust Manager k170v instance with 4 CPUs and 16 GB RAM.

    The approximate number of users this configuration can handle is 2425.

  2. Response time compliance of around 200 ms was met for a maximum throughput of 455.05 operations per second with a two-node CipherTrust Manager k170v cluster (each node with 4 CPUs and 16 GB RAM) connected with an AWS load balancer.

    The approximate number of users this configuration can handle is 4551.

  3. Response time compliance of around 200 ms was met for a maximum throughput of 524.96 operations per second with a standalone CipherTrust Manager k470v instance with 8 CPUs and 64 GB RAM.

    The approximate number of users this configuration can handle is 5250.

  4. Response time compliance of around 200 ms was met for a maximum throughput of 968.94 operations per second with a two-node CipherTrust Manager k470v cluster (each node with 8 CPUs and 64 GB RAM) connected with an AWS load balancer.

    The approximate number of users this configuration can handle is 9689.

Conclusion

The number of users and throughput almost doubles up on moving from CipherTrust Manager k170v to k470v. Moreover, adding an additional node to the cluster also doubles up the throughput. Overall, a performance gain of 400 percent is achieved by moving from a standalone CipherTrust Manager k170v to a two-node CipherTrust Manager k470v cluster.