hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Yu Li <car...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Use experience and performance data of offheap from Alibaba online cluster
Date Fri, 18 Nov 2016 17:02:31 GMT
@Ted:
bq. Do you think you or your coworker has the bandwidth to publish backport
for branch-1 ?
Yes, we'd like to try, but does this follow the tradition? AFAIK 2.0 is
about to come out (IIRC the plan is to release alpha by end of year?) and
this should be a core feature there for advertising 2.0? Please forgive my
conservatism if I am (Smile).

Removing user@ mailing list to keep the discussion among developers before
we got a conclusion.

Best Regards,
Yu

On 19 November 2016 at 00:44, Yu Li <carp84@gmail.com> wrote:

> Sorry guys, let me retry the inline images:
>
> Performance w/o offheap:
>
> ​
> Performance w/ offheap:
>
> ​
> Peak Get QPS of one single RS during Singles' Day (11/11):
>
> ​
>
> And attach the files in case inline still not working:
> ​​​
>  Performance_without_offheap.png
> <https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B017Q40_F5uwbWEzUGktYVIya3JkcXVjRkFvVGNtM0VxWC1n/view?usp=drive_web>
> ​​
>  Performance_with_offheap.png
> <https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B017Q40_F5uweGR2cnJEU0M1MWwtRFJ5YkxUeFVrcUdPc2ww/view?usp=drive_web>
> ​​
>  Peak_Get_QPS_of_Single_RS.png
> <https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B017Q40_F5uwQ2FkR2k0ZmEtRVNGSFp5RUxHM3F6bHpNYnJz/view?usp=drive_web>
> ​
>
>
> Best Regards,
> Yu
>
> On 18 November 2016 at 19:29, Ted Yu <yuzhihong@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Yu:
>> With positive results, more hbase users would be asking for the backport
>> of offheap read path patches.
>>
>> Do you think you or your coworker has the bandwidth to publish backport
>> for branch-1 ?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> > On Nov 18, 2016, at 12:11 AM, Yu Li <carp84@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > Dear all,
>> >
>> > We have backported read path offheap (HBASE-11425) to our customized
>> hbase-1.1.2 (thanks @Anoop for the help/support) and run it online for more
>> than a month, and would like to share our experience, for what it's worth
>> (smile).
>> >
>> > Generally speaking, we gained a better and more stable
>> throughput/performance with offheap, and below are some details:
>> > 1. QPS become more stable with offheap
>> >
>> > Performance w/o offheap:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Performance w/ offheap:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > These data come from our online A/B test cluster (with 450 physical
>> machines, and each with 256G memory + 64 core) with real world workloads,
>> it shows using offheap we could gain a more stable throughput as well as
>> better performance
>> >
>> > Not showing fully online data here because for online we published the
>> version with both offheap and NettyRpcServer together, so no standalone
>> comparison data for offheap
>> >
>> > 2. Full GC frequency and cost
>> >
>> > Average Full GC STW time reduce from 11s to 7s with offheap.
>> >
>> > 3. Young GC frequency and cost
>> >
>> > No performance degradation observed with offheap.
>> >
>> > 4. Peak throughput of one single RS
>> >
>> > On Singles Day (11/11), peak throughput of one single RS reached 100K,
>> among which 90K from Get. Plus internet in/out data we could know the
>> average result size of get request is ~1KB
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Offheap are used on all online machines (more than 1600 nodes) instead
>> of LruCache, so the above QPS is gained from offheap bucketcache, along
>> with NettyRpcServer(HBASE-15756).
>> >
>> > Just let us know if any comments. Thanks.
>> >
>> > Best Regards,
>> > Yu
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>

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