Mailing-List: contact commits-help@cassandra.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@cassandra.apache.org
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2013 03:49:30 +0000 (UTC)
From: "Jonathan Ellis (JIRA)" <jira@apache.org>
To: commits@cassandra.apache.org
Message-ID: <JIRA.12665353.1377305467316.15548.1380685770579@arcas>
In-Reply-To: <JIRA.12665353.1377305467316@arcas>
References: <JIRA.12665353.1377305467316@arcas>
Subject: [jira] [Comment Edited] (CASSANDRA-5932) Speculative read
 performance data show unexpected results
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-5932?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13783613#comment-13783613 ] 

Jonathan Ellis edited comment on CASSANDRA-5932 at 10/2/13 3:49 AM:
--------------------------------------------------------------------

The throughput is a wash in the compaction scenario, but the 99.9% latency looks a lot better with the retries.

Any theories on why the percentile settings are posting better than ALWAYS though?


was (Author: jbellis):
The throughput is a wash, but the 99.9% latency looks a lot better with the retries.

Any theories on why the percentile settings are posting better than ALWAYS though?

> Speculative read performance data show unexpected results
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CASSANDRA-5932
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-5932
>             Project: Cassandra
>          Issue Type: Bug
>            Reporter: Ryan McGuire
>            Assignee: Aleksey Yeschenko
>             Fix For: 2.0.2
>
>         Attachments: 5932.6692c50412ef7d.compaction.png, 5932-6692c50412ef7d.png, 5932.6692c50412ef7d.rr0.png, 5932.ded39c7e1c2fa.logs.tar.gz, 5932.txt, 5933-128_and_200rc1.png, 5933-7a87fc11.png, 5933-logs.tar.gz, 5933-randomized-dsnitch-replica.2.png, 5933-randomized-dsnitch-replica.3.png, 5933-randomized-dsnitch-replica.png, compaction-makes-slow.png, compaction-makes-slow-stats.png, eager-read-looks-promising.png, eager-read-looks-promising-stats.png, eager-read-not-consistent.png, eager-read-not-consistent-stats.png, node-down-increase-performance.png
>
>
> I've done a series of stress tests with eager retries enabled that show undesirable behavior. I'm grouping these behaviours into one ticket as they are most likely related.
> 1) Killing off a node in a 4 node cluster actually increases performance.
> 2) Compactions make nodes slow, even after the compaction is done.
> 3) Eager Reads tend to lessen the *immediate* performance impact of a node going down, but not consistently.
> My Environment:
> 1 stress machine: node0
> 4 C* nodes: node4, node5, node6, node7
> My script:
> node0 writes some data: stress -d node4 -F 30000000 -n 30000000 -i 5 -l 2 -K 20
> node0 reads some data: stress -d node4 -n 30000000 -o read -i 5 -K 20
> h3. Examples:
> h5. A node going down increases performance:
> !node-down-increase-performance.png!
> [Data for this test here|http://ryanmcguire.info/ds/graph/graph.html?stats=stats.eager_retry.node_killed.just_20.json&metric=interval_op_rate&operation=stress-read&smoothing=1]
> At 450s, I kill -9 one of the nodes. There is a brief decrease in performance as the snitch adapts, but then it recovers... to even higher performance than before.
> h5. Compactions make nodes permanently slow:
> !compaction-makes-slow.png!
> !compaction-makes-slow-stats.png!
> The green and orange lines represent trials with eager retry enabled, they never recover their op-rate from before the compaction as the red and blue lines do.
> [Data for this test here|http://ryanmcguire.info/ds/graph/graph.html?stats=stats.eager_retry.compaction.2.json&metric=interval_op_rate&operation=stress-read&smoothing=1]
> h5. Speculative Read tends to lessen the *immediate* impact:
> !eager-read-looks-promising.png!
> !eager-read-looks-promising-stats.png!
> This graph looked the most promising to me, the two trials with eager retry, the green and orange line, at 450s showed the smallest dip in performance. 
> [Data for this test here|http://ryanmcguire.info/ds/graph/graph.html?stats=stats.eager_retry.node_killed.json&metric=interval_op_rate&operation=stress-read&smoothing=1]
> h5. But not always:
> !eager-read-not-consistent.png!
> !eager-read-not-consistent-stats.png!
> This is a retrial with the same settings as above, yet the 95percentile eager retry (red line) did poorly this time at 450s.
> [Data for this test here|http://ryanmcguire.info/ds/graph/graph.html?stats=stats.eager_retry.node_killed.just_20.rc1.try2.json&metric=interval_op_rate&operation=stress-read&smoothing=1]


--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.1#6144)