hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stack <st...@duboce.net>
Subject Re: Performance degradation between CDH5.3.1(HBase0.98.6) and CDH5.4.5(HBase1.0.0)
Date Mon, 30 Nov 2015 20:47:32 GMT
Rollback is untested. No fix in 5.5. I was going to work on this now. Where
are your counters Bryan? In their own column family or scattered about in a
row with other Cell types?
St.Ack

On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 10:28 AM, Bryan Beaudreault <
bbeaudreault@hubspot.com> wrote:

> Is there any update to this? We just upgraded all of our production
> clusters from CDH4 to CDH5.4.7 and, not seeing this JIRA listed in the
> known issues, did not not about this.  Now we are seeing perfomance issues
> across all clusters, as we make heavy use of increments.
>
> Can we roll forward to CDH5.5 to fix? Or is our only hope to roll back to
> CDH 5.3.1 (if that is possible)?
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 5:06 AM 鈴木俊裕 <brfrn169@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Thank you St.Ack!
> >
> > I would like to follow the ticket.
> >
> > Toshihiro Suzuki
> >
> > 2015-09-22 14:14 GMT+09:00 Stack <stack@duboce.net>:
> >
> > > Back to this problem. Simple tests confirm that as is, the
> > > single-queue-backed MVCC instance can slow Region ops if some other row
> > is
> > > slow to complete. In particular Increment, checkAndPut, and batch
> > mutations
> > > are effected. I opened HBASE-14460 to start in on a fix up. Lets see if
> > we
> > > can somehow scope mvcc to row or at least shard mvcc so not all Region
> > ops
> > > are paused.
> > >
> > > St.Ack
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 4:15 AM, 鈴木俊裕 <brfrn169@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > Thank you for the below reasoning (with accompanying helpful
> > diagram).
> > > > > Makes sense. Let me hack up a test case to help with the
> > illustration.
> > > It
> > > > > is as though the mvcc should be scoped to a row only... Writes
> > against
> > > > > other rows should not hold up my read of my row. Tag an mvcc with
a
> > > 'row'
> > > > > scope so we can see which on-going writes pertain to current
> > operation?
> > > > Thank you St.Ack! I think this approach would work.
> > > >
> > > > > You need to read back the increment and have it be 'correct' at
> > > increment
> > > > > time?
> > > > Yes, we need it.
> > > >
> > > > I would like to help if there is anything I can do.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Toshihiro Suzuki
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 2015-09-13 14:11 GMT+09:00 Stack <stack@duboce.net>:
> > > >
> > > > > Thank you for the below reasoning (with accompanying helpful
> > diagram).
> > > > > Makes sense. Let me hack up a test case to help with the
> > illustration.
> > > It
> > > > > is as though the mvcc should be scoped to a row only... Writes
> > against
> > > > > other rows should not hold up my read of my row. Tag an mvcc with
a
> > > 'row'
> > > > > scope so we can see which on-going writes pertain to current
> > operation?
> > > > >
> > > > > You need to read back the increment and have it be 'correct' at
> > > increment
> > > > > time?
> > > > >
> > > > > (This is a good one)
> > > > >
> > > > > Thank you Toshihiro Suzuki
> > > > > St.Ack
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sat, Sep 12, 2015 at 8:09 AM, 鈴木俊裕 <brfrn169@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > St.Ack,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thank you for your response.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Why I make out that "A region lock (not a row lock) seems to
> occur
> > in
> > > > > > waitForPreviousTransactionsComplete()" is as follows:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > A increment operation has 3 procedures for MVCC.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1. mvcc.waitForPreviousTransactionsComplete();
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/cloudera/hbase/blob/cdh5.4.5-release/hbase-server/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/regionserver/HRegion.java#L6712
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2. w = mvcc.beginMemstoreInsertWithSeqNum(mvccNum);
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/cloudera/hbase/blob/cdh5.4.5-release/hbase-server/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/regionserver/HRegion.java#L6721
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 3. mvcc.completeMemstoreInsertWithSeqNum(w, walKey);
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/cloudera/hbase/blob/cdh5.4.5-release/hbase-server/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/regionserver/HRegion.java#L6893
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think that MultiVersionConsistencyControl's writeQueue can
> cause
> > a
> > > > > region
> > > > > > lock.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/cloudera/hbase/blob/cdh5.4.5-release/hbase-server/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/regionserver/MultiVersionConsistencyControl.java#L42-L43
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Step 2 adds to a WriteEntry to writeQueue.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/cloudera/hbase/blob/cdh5.4.5-release/hbase-server/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/regionserver/MultiVersionConsistencyControl.java#L102-L108
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Step 3 removes the WriteEntry from writeQueue.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > completeMemstoreInsertWithSeqNum(w, walKey) ->
> > > > > > waitForPreviousTransactionsComplete(e) -> advanceMemstore(w)
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/cloudera/hbase/blob/cdh5.4.5-release/hbase-server/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/regionserver/MultiVersionConsistencyControl.java#L127
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/cloudera/hbase/blob/cdh5.4.5-release/hbase-server/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/regionserver/MultiVersionConsistencyControl.java#L235
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/cloudera/hbase/blob/cdh5.4.5-release/hbase-server/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/regionserver/MultiVersionConsistencyControl.java#L160
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Step 1 adds a WriteEntry w in beginMemstoreInsert() to writeQueue
> > and
> > > > > waits
> > > > > > until writeQueue is empty or writeQueue.getFirst() == w.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/cloudera/hbase/blob/cdh5.4.5-release/hbase-server/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/regionserver/MultiVersionConsistencyControl.java#L201-L204
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/cloudera/hbase/blob/cdh5.4.5-release/hbase-server/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/regionserver/MultiVersionConsistencyControl.java#L206-L241
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think when a handler thread is processing between step 2 and
> step
> > > 3,
> > > > > the
> > > > > > other handler threads can wait at step 1 until the thread
> completes
> > > > step
> > > > > 3
> > > > > > This is depicted as follows:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://gist.githubusercontent.com/brfrn169/cb4f2c157129330cd932/raw/86d6aae5667b0fe006b16fed80f1b0c4945c7fd0/region_lock.png
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Actually, in the thread dump of our region server, many handler
> > > threads
> > > > > > (RW.default.writeRpcServer.handler) wait at Step 1
> > > > > > (waitForPreviousTransactionsComplete()).
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://gist.githubusercontent.com/brfrn169/cb4f2c157129330cd932/raw/86d6aae5667b0fe006b16fed80f1b0c4945c7fd0/thread_dump.txt
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Many handler threads wait at this:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/cloudera/hbase/blob/cdh5.4.5-release/hbase-server/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/regionserver/MultiVersionConsistencyControl.java#L224
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Is it possible you are contending on a counter post-upgrade?
> Is
> > it
> > > > > > > possible that all these threads are trying to get to the
same
> row
> > > to
> > > > > > update
> > > > > > > it? Could the app behavior have changed?  Or are you thinking
> > > > increment
> > > > > > > itself has slowed significantly?
> > > > > > We have just upgraded HBase, not changed the app behavior. We
are
> > > > > thinking
> > > > > > increment itself has slowed significantly.
> > > > > > Before upgrading HBase, it was good throughput and latency.
> > > > > > Currently, to cope with this problem, we split the regions
> finely.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Toshihiro Suzuki
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2015-09-09 15:29 GMT+09:00 Stack <stack@duboce.net>:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 10:22 PM, 鈴木俊裕 <brfrn169@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Ted,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thank you for your response.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I uploaded the complete stack trace to Gist.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > https://gist.github.com/brfrn169/cb4f2c157129330cd932
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I think that increment operation works as follows:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 1. get row lock
> > > > > > > > 2. mvcc.waitForPreviousTransactionsComplete() // wait
for all
> > > prior
> > > > > > MVCC
> > > > > > > > transactions to finish
> > > > > > > > 3. mvcc.beginMemstoreInsertWithSeqNum() // start a
> transaction
> > > > > > > > 4. get previous values
> > > > > > > > 5. create KVs
> > > > > > > > 6. write to Memstore
> > > > > > > > 7. write to WAL
> > > > > > > > 8. release row lock
> > > > > > > > 9. mvcc.completeMemstoreInsertWithSeqNum() // complete
the
> > > > > transaction
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > A instance of MultiVersionConsistencyControl has a
pending
> > queue
> > > of
> > > > > > > writes
> > > > > > > > named writeQueue.
> > > > > > > > Step 2 puts a WriteEntry w to writeQueue and waits
until
> > > writeQueue
> > > > > is
> > > > > > > > empty or writeQueue.getFirst() == w.
> > > > > > > > Step 3 puts a WriteEntry to writeQueue and step 9
removes the
> > > > > > WriteEntry
> > > > > > > > from writeQueue.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I think that when a handler thread is processing between
> step 2
> > > and
> > > > > > step
> > > > > > > 9,
> > > > > > > > the other handler threads can wait until the thread
completes
> > > step
> > > > 9.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > That is right. We need to read, after all outstanding updates
> are
> > > > > done...
> > > > > > > because we need to read the latest update before we go
to
> > > > > > modify/increment
> > > > > > > it.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > How do you make out this?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "A region lock (not a row lock) seems to occur in
> > > > > > > waitForPreviousTransactionsComplete()."
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > In 0.98.x we did this:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > mvcc.completeMemstoreInsert(mvcc.beginMemstoreInsert());
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ... and in 1.0 we do this:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > mvcc.waitForPreviousTransactionsComplete() which is this....
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > +  public void waitForPreviousTransactionsComplete() {
> > > > > > > +    WriteEntry w = beginMemstoreInsert();
> > > > > > > +    waitForPreviousTransactionsComplete(w);
> > > > > > > +  }
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The mvcc and region sequenceid were merged in 1.0 (
> > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8763). Previous
> mvcc
> > > and
> > > > > > > region
> > > > > > > sequenceid would spin independent of each other. Perhaps
this
> > > > > responsible
> > > > > > > for some slow down.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > That said, looking in your thread dump, we seem to be down
in
> the
> > > > Get.
> > > > > If
> > > > > > > you do a bunch of thread dumps in a row, where is the
> > lock-holding
> > > > > > thread?
> > > > > > > In Get or writing Increment... or waiting on sequence id?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Is it possible you are contending on a counter post-upgrade?
> Is
> > it
> > > > > > > possible that all these threads are trying to get to the
same
> row
> > > to
> > > > > > update
> > > > > > > it? Could the app behavior have changed?  Or are you thinking
> > > > increment
> > > > > > > itself has slowed significantly?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > St.Ack
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Toshihiro Suzuki
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 2015-09-09 0:05 GMT+09:00 Ted Yu <yuzhihong@gmail.com>:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > In HRegion#increment(), we lock the row (not
region):
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >     try {
> > > > > > > > >       rowLock = getRowLock(row);
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Can you pastebin the complete stack trace ?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Thanks
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 2:01 AM, 鈴木俊裕
<brfrn169@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > We upgraded our cluster from CDH5.3.1(HBase0.98.6)
to
> > > > > > > > > CDH5.4.5(HBase1.0.0)
> > > > > > > > > > and we experience slowdown in increment
operation.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Here's an extract from thread dump of the
RegionServer of
> > our
> > > > > > > cluster:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Thread 68
> > > > > > (RW.default.writeRpcServer.handler=15,queue=5,port=60020):
> > > > > > > > > >   State: BLOCKED
> > > > > > > > > >   Blocked count: 21689888
> > > > > > > > > >   Waited count: 39828360
> > > > > > > > > >   Blocked on java.util.LinkedList@3474e4b2
> > > > > > > > > >   Blocked by 63
> > > > > > > > (RW.default.writeRpcServer.handler=10,queue=0,port=60020)
> > > > > > > > > >   Stack:
> > > > > > > > > >     java.lang.Object.wait(Native Method)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> org.apache.hadoop.hbase.regionserver.MultiVersionConsistencyControl.waitForPreviousTransactionsComplete(MultiVersionConsistencyControl.java:224)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> org.apache.hadoop.hbase.regionserver.MultiVersionConsistencyControl.waitForPreviousTransactionsComplete(MultiVersionConsistencyControl.java:203)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > org.apache.hadoop.hbase.regionserver.HRegion.increment(HRegion.java:6712)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> org.apache.hadoop.hbase.regionserver.RSRpcServices.increment(RSRpcServices.java:501)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> org.apache.hadoop.hbase.regionserver.RSRpcServices.doNonAtomicRegionMutation(RSRpcServices.java:570)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> org.apache.hadoop.hbase.regionserver.RSRpcServices.multi(RSRpcServices.java:1901)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> org.apache.hadoop.hbase.protobuf.generated.ClientProtos$ClientService$2.callBlockingMethod(ClientProtos.java:31451)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > >  org.apache.hadoop.hbase.ipc.RpcServer.call(RpcServer.java:2035)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > >  org.apache.hadoop.hbase.ipc.CallRunner.run(CallRunner.java:107)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> org.apache.hadoop.hbase.ipc.RpcExecutor.consumerLoop(RpcExecutor.java:130)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > org.apache.hadoop.hbase.ipc.RpcExecutor$1.run(RpcExecutor.java:107)
> > > > > > > > > >     java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > There are many similar threads in the thread
dump.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I read the source code and I think this
is caused by
> > changes
> > > of
> > > > > > > > > > MultiVersionConsistencyControl.
> > > > > > > > > > A region lock (not a row lock) seems to
occur in
> > > > > > > > > > waitForPreviousTransactionsComplete().
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Also we wrote performance test code for
increment
> operation
> > > > that
> > > > > > > > included
> > > > > > > > > > 100 threads and ran it in local mode.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > The result is shown below:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > CDH5.3.1(HBase0.98.6)
> > > > > > > > > > Throughput(op/s): 12757, Latency(ms): 7.975072509210629
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > CDH5.4.5(HBase1.0.0)
> > > > > > > > > > Throughput(op/s): 2027, Latency(ms): 49.11840157868772
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Toshihiro Suzuki
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message