hbase-user 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 Tue, 01 Dec 2015 04:26:11 GMT
Still slow increments though?

On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 5:05 PM, Bryan Beaudreault <bbeaudreault@hubspot.com
> wrote:

> Those log lines have settled down, they may have been related to a
> cluster-wide forced restart at the time.
>
> On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 7:59 PM Bryan Beaudreault <
> bbeaudreault@hubspot.com>
> wrote:
>
> > We've been doing more debugging of this and have set up the read vs write
> > handlers to try to at least segment this away so reads can work. We have
> > pretty beefy servers, and are running wiht the following settings:
> >
> > hbase.regionserver.handler.count=1000
> > hbase.ipc.server.read.threadpool.size=50
> > hbase.ipc.server.callqueue.handler.factor=0.025
> > hbase.ipc.server.callqueue.read.ratio=0.6
> > hbase.ipc.server.callqueue.scan.ratio=0.5
> >
> > We are seeing all 400 write handlers taken up by row locks for the most
> > part. The read handlers are mostly idle. We're thinking of changing the
> > ratio here, but are not sure it will help if they are all blocked on a
> row
> > lock.  We just enabled DEBUG logging on all our servers and notice the
> > following:
> >
> > 2015-12-01 00:56:09,015 DEBUG
> > org.apache.hadoop.hbase.regionserver.ServerNonceManager: Conflict
> detected
> > by nonce: [-687451119961178644:7664336281906118656], [state 0, hasWait
> > false, activity 00:54:36.240]
> > 2015-12-01 00:56:09,015 DEBUG
> > org.apache.hadoop.hbase.regionserver.ServerNonceManager: Conflict
> detected
> > by nonce: [-687451119961178644:-7119840249342174227], [state 0, hasWait
> > false, activity 00:54:36.256]
> > 2015-12-01 00:56:09,268 DEBUG
> > org.apache.hadoop.hbase.regionserver.ServerNonceManager: Conflict
> detected
> > by nonce: [-5946137511131403479:2112661701888365489], [state 0, hasWait
> > false, activity 00:55:01.259]
> > 2015-12-01 00:56:09,279 DEBUG
> > org.apache.hadoop.hbase.regionserver.ServerNonceManager: Conflict
> detected
> > by nonce: [4165332617675853029:6256955295384472057], [state 0, hasWait
> > false, activity 00:53:58.151]
> > 2015-12-01 00:56:09,279 DEBUG
> > org.apache.hadoop.hbase.regionserver.ServerNonceManager: Conflict
> detected
> > by nonce: [4165332617675853029:4961178013070912522], [state 0, hasWait
> > false, activity 00:53:58.162]
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 6:11 PM Bryan Beaudreault <
> > bbeaudreault@hubspot.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Sorry the second link should be
> >>
> https://gist.github.com/bbeaudreault/2994a748da83d9f75085#file-gistfile1-txt-L579
> >>
> >> On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 6:10 PM Bryan Beaudreault <
> >> bbeaudreault@hubspot.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> https://gist.github.com/bbeaudreault/2994a748da83d9f75085
> >>>
> >>> An active handler:
> >>>
> https://gist.github.com/bbeaudreault/2994a748da83d9f75085#file-gistfile1-txt-L286
> >>> One that is locked:
> >>>
> https://git.hubteam.com/gist/jwilliams/80f37999bfdf55119588#file-gistfile1-txt-L579
> >>>
> >>> The difference between pre-rollback and post is that previously we were
> >>> seeing things blocked in mvcc.  Now we are seeing them blocked on the
> >>> upsert.
> >>>
> >>> It always follows the same pattern, of 1 active handler in the upsert
> >>> and the rest blocked waiting for it.
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 6:05 PM Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 2:31 PM, Bryan Beaudreault <
> >>>> bbeaudreault@hubspot.com
> >>>> > wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> > The rollback seems to have mostly solved the issue for one of our
> >>>> clusters,
> >>>> > but another one is still seeing long increment times:
> >>>> >
> >>>> > "slowIncrementCount": 52080,
> >>>> > "Increment_num_ops": 325236,"Increment_min": 1,"Increment_max":
> 6162,"
> >>>> > Increment_mean": 465.68678129112396,"Increment_median": 216,"
> >>>> > Increment_75th_percentile": 450.25,"Increment_95th_percentile":
> >>>> > 1052.6499999999999,"Increment_99th_percentile": 1635.2399999999998
> >>>> >
> >>>> >
> >>>> > Any ideas if there are other changes that may be causing a
> performance
> >>>> > regression for increments between CDH4.7.1 and CDH5.3.8?
> >>>> >
> >>>> >
> >>>> >
> >>>> No.
> >>>>
> >>>> Post a thread dump Bryan and it might prompt something.
> >>>>
> >>>> St.Ack
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> >
> >>>> > On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 4:13 PM Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:
> >>>> >
> >>>> > > On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 12:54 PM, Bryan Beaudreault <
> >>>> > > bbeaudreault@hubspot.com> wrote:
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > > > Should this be added as a known issue in the CDH or hbase
> >>>> > documentation?
> >>>> > > It
> >>>> > > > was a severe performance hit for us, all of our regionservers
> were
> >>>> > > sitting
> >>>> > > > at a few thousand queued requests.
> >>>> > > >
> >>>> > > >
> >>>> > > Let me take care of that.
> >>>> > > St.Ack
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > > > On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 3:53 PM Bryan Beaudreault <
> >>>> > > > bbeaudreault@hubspot.com>
> >>>> > > > wrote:
> >>>> > > >
> >>>> > > > > Yea, they are all over the place and called from client and
> >>>> > coprocessor
> >>>> > > > > code. We ended up having no other option but to rollback, and
> >>>> aside
> >>>> > > from
> >>>> > > > a
> >>>> > > > > few NoSuchMethodErrors due to API changes (Put#add vs
> >>>> Put#addColumn),
> >>>> > > it
> >>>> > > > > seems to be working and fixing our problem.
> >>>> > > > >
> >>>> > > > > On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 3:47 PM Stack <stack@duboce.net>
> wrote:
> >>>> > > > >
> >>>> > > > >> 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