hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From 张铎(Duo Zhang) <palomino...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Performance degradation in master (compared to 2-alpha-1)
Date Wed, 29 Nov 2017 02:32:13 GMT
And one thing may effect performance is that, now we rely on
CompletableFuture more and more in our code base, but at least before
jdk8u131 there is a performance regression for CompletableFuture. So
consider moving to the newest jdk if you are still on an older version.

Thanks.

2017-11-29 3:35 GMT+08:00 Mike Drob <mdrob@apache.org>:

> Ted,
>
> To clarify, I'm talking about a hypothetical bugfix that impacted
> performance, not to imply that I know of a specific such change.
>
> I've seen it often enough before that performance is blazing fast at the
> expense of accuracy and people are surprised when correctness takes longer.
>
>
> Mike
>
> On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 1:01 PM, Ted Yu <yuzhihong@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Mike:
> > Which JIRA was the important bug-fix ?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 9:16 AM, Mike Drob <mdrob@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Eshcar - do you have time to try the other alpha releases and see where
> > > exactly we introduced the regressions?
> > >
> > > Also, I'm worried that the performance regression may be related to an
> > > important bug-fix, where before we may have had fast writes but also
> > risked
> > > incorrect behavior somehow.
> > >
> > > Mike
> > >
> > > On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 2:48 AM, Eshcar Hillel <eshcar@oath.com.invalid
> >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I agree, so will wait till we focus on performance.
> > > > Just one more update, I also ran the same experiment (write-only)
> with
> > > > banch-2 beta-1.Here is a summary of the throughput I see in each
> > > tag/branch:
> > > > -------------------------------              | BASIC | NONE  |
> > > > -------------------------------2-alpha-1| 110K   | 80K     |
> > > > 2-beta-1 |  81K    | 62K     |
> > > > master    | 60K     | 55K     |-------------------------------
> > > > This means there are multiple sources for the regression.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > >
> > > >     On Saturday, November 25, 2017, 7:44:01 AM GMT+2, 张铎(Duo Zhang)
<
> > > > palomino219@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >  I think first we need a release plan on when we will begin to focus
> on
> > > the
> > > > performance issue?
> > > >
> > > > I do not think it is a good time to focus on performance issue now as
> > we
> > > > haven’t stabilized our build yet. The performance regression may come
> > > back
> > > > again after some bug fixes and maybe we use a wrong way to increase
> > > > performance and finally we find that it is just a bug...
> > > >
> > > > Of course I do not mean we can not do any performance related issues
> > now,
> > > > for example, HBASE-19338 is a good catch and can be fixed right now.
> > > >
> > > > And also, for AsyncFSWAL and in memory compaction, we need to
> consider
> > > the
> > > > performance right now as they are born for performance, but let’s
> focus
> > > on
> > > > the comparison to other policies, not a previous release so we can
> find
> > > the
> > > > correct things to fix.
> > > >
> > > > Of course, if there is a big performance downgrading comparing to the
> > > > previous release and we find it then we should tell others, just like
> > > this
> > > > email. An earlier notification is always welcomed.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks.
> > > >
> > > > Stack <stack@duboce.net>于2017年11月25日 周六13:22写道:
> > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 7:35 AM, Eshcar Hillel
> > <eshcar@oath.com.invalid
> > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Happy Thanksgiving all,
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > And to you Eshcar.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > In recent benchmarks I ran in HBASE-18294 I discovered major
> > > > performance
> > > > > > degradation of master code w.r.t 2-alpha-1 code.I am running
> > > write-only
> > > > > > workload (similar to the one reported in HBASE-16417). I am
using
> > the
> > > > > same
> > > > > > hardware and same configuration settings (specifically, I testes
> > both
> > > > > basic
> > > > > > memstore compaction with optimal parameters, and no memsore
> > > > > > compaction).While in 2-alpha-1 code I see throughput of ~110Kops
> > for
> > > > > basic
> > > > > > compaction and ~80Kops for no compaction, in the master code
I
> get
> > > only
> > > > > > 60Kops and 55Kops, respectively. *This is almost 50% reduction
in
> > > > > > performance*.
> > > > > > (1) Did anyone else noticed such degradation?(2) Do we have
any
> > > > > systematic
> > > > > > automatic/semi-automatic method to track the sources of this
> > > > performance
> > > > > > issue?
> > > > > > Thanks,Eshcar
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On #1, no. I've not done perf compare. I wonder if later alpha
> > versions
> > > > > include the regression (I'll have to check and see).
> > > > >
> > > > > On #2, again no. I intend to do a bit of perf tuning and compare
> > before
> > > > > release.
> > > > >
> > > > > If you don't file an issue, I will do so later for myself as a task
> > to
> > > > > compare at least to alpha-1.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks Eshcar,
> > > > >
> > > > > St.Ack
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

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