Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-cassandra-user-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-cassandra-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7D41210950 for ; Tue, 22 Oct 2013 08:24:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 7149 invoked by uid 500); 22 Oct 2013 08:24:36 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-cassandra-user-archive@cassandra.apache.org Received: (qmail 6972 invoked by uid 500); 22 Oct 2013 08:24:28 -0000 Mailing-List: contact user-help@cassandra.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: user@cassandra.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list user@cassandra.apache.org Received: (qmail 6962 invoked by uid 99); 22 Oct 2013 08:24:26 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 22 Oct 2013 08:24:26 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of andrew.bialecki@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.182 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.212.182] (HELO mail-wi0-f182.google.com) (209.85.212.182) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 22 Oct 2013 08:24:20 +0000 Received: by mail-wi0-f182.google.com with SMTP id ez12so5235383wid.9 for ; Tue, 22 Oct 2013 01:24:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=Hjalrke83ny/xzJ4RjjkZrx2oQz82aeq4KfB9oRz0g0=; b=I9vUgGyylIeFNB7ZVhSUd1rbU03s8zv2mkJscEgGtryACK4hbziXsghleCdqT0rWbW iWTQuHbVSYyfrEiyNIwWB8bgiAdqf4FEI47fHQlpE7lxp7Y1/U8BcknWI8PeWdSHR0kI hO41lUug98CITnbSF62q87cw1mqwQk2Xy0fqk1YYHn3GuKZNQw8fWDi5aV7A2Ps6JPyd mlpLaJZAiJn3KvsG+tOQc46A5nTRFLJwcuLbqI7Mh56kKVA+p7ATSfzrr9yhf8U9zLG3 4nybSY3kLFxzImrnaOqMxTPckz/1dKxziBbJdHGIHyem2EdWBRuu6Fsh+74yMCJWXDMz 6F7A== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.194.9.70 with SMTP id x6mr17053958wja.22.1382430240040; Tue, 22 Oct 2013 01:24:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.217.62.133 with HTTP; Tue, 22 Oct 2013 01:23:59 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 04:23:59 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: High number of ReplicateOnWriteStage All timed blocked, counter CF From: Andrew Bialecki To: user@cassandra.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b5d57ce626ddf04e9501f70 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --047d7b5d57ce626ddf04e9501f70 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hey everyone, We're stress testing writes for a few counter CFs and noticed one one node we got to the point where the ReplicateOnWriteStage thread pool was backed up and it started blocking those tasks. This cluster is six nodes, RF=3, running 1.2.9. All CFs have LCS with 160 MB sstables. All writes were CL.ONE. Few questions: 1. What causes a RoW (replicate of write) task to be blocked? The queue maxes out at 4128, which seems to be 32 * (128 + 1). 32 is the number of concurrent_writers we have. 2. Given this is a counter CF, can those dropped RoWs be repaired with a "nodetool repair?" From my understanding of how counter writes work, until we run that repair, if we're not using CL.ALL / read_repair_chance = 1, we will get some incorrect reads, but a repair will fix things. Is that right? 3. The CPU on the node where we started seeing the number of blocked tasks increase was pegged, but I/O was not saturated. There were compactions running on those column families as well. Is there a setting we could consider altering that might prevent that back up or is the answer likely, "increase the number of nodes to get more throughput." Thanks in advance for any insights! Andrew --047d7b5d57ce626ddf04e9501f70 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hey everyone,

We're stress testing = writes for a few counter CFs and noticed one one node we got to the point w= here the ReplicateOnWriteStage thread pool was backed up and it started blo= cking those tasks. This cluster is six nodes, RF=3D3, running 1.2.9. All CF= s have LCS with 160 MB sstables. All writes were CL.ONE.

Few questions:
  1. What causes a RoW (rep= licate of write) task to be blocked? The queue maxes out at 4128, which see= ms to be 32 * (128 + 1). 32 is the number of concurrent_writers we have.
  2. Given this is a counter CF, can those dropped RoWs be repaired= with a "nodetool repair?" From my understanding of how counter w= rites work, until we run that repair, if we're not using CL.ALL / read_= repair_chance =3D 1, we will get some incorrect reads, but a repair will fi= x things. Is that right?

  3. The CPU on the node where we started seeing the number of bloc= ked tasks increase was pegged, but I/O was not saturated. There were compac= tions running on those column families as well. Is there a setting we could= consider altering that might prevent that back up or is the answer likely,= "increase the number of nodes to get more throughput."

Thanks in advance for any insights!

Andrew
--047d7b5d57ce626ddf04e9501f70--