Forum Discussion
Advocate ITest stress for fabric capacity
Resolver IWe faced a similar challenge in sizing production capacity. After baseline testing with 39GB of compressed data, F64 couldn’t handle loads beyond 40GB—leading to pipeline hangs and low throughput. F128 performed reliably. For accurate sizing, stress test with realistic loads and monitor capacity usage via the Fabric Metrics App.
Below with the sample comparison on the stress test in our scenario. Hope this helps.
Comparison between F64 and F128
| F64 | F128 |
Total Capacity Units | 1920 | 3840 |
File size in GB (Compressed) | 39 | 39 |
Total files | 12528 | 12528 |
How many files processed | 12444 | 12528 |
How many files not processed | 84 | 0 |
CU % Utilization | 82% | 42% |
Performance | Slow when it reached 70% | Fast – No slowness |
Pipeline succeeded | Not completed fully | Completed Successfully |
Projected CU% Utilization | ||
50 GB (Compressed) | 105.10% | 54% |
52 GB (Compressed) | 110% | 56% |