kudu-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Pavel Martynov <mr.xk...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Bad insert performance of java kudu-client
Date Tue, 25 Apr 2017 12:10:34 GMT
I reproduce this problem with java.net.NetworkInterface.getByInetAddress
and Windows on a few other machines. Also found this 'not an issue'
http://bugs.java.com/view_bug.do?bug_id=7039343.
Maybe kudu-client will use some memoization for this function?

2017-04-25 13:09 GMT+03:00 Pavel Martynov <mr.xkurt@gmail.com>:

> I figure out that problem was that I run this program on my development
> Windows machine. It seems that there is some performance issue with
> java.net.NetworkInterface.getByInetAddress on Windows (I found only that
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/35541870/java-networkinterface-
> getbyinetaddress-takes-way-too-long confirmation so far). See profiler
> screenshot http://pasteboard.co/8uHil3I5H.png (kudu-client v1.3.1), every
> call take 53 ms (!) on average.
> Also, could you recheck logic, why this function recalls 88 times in 12
> seconds for that small program?
>
> 2017-04-24 22:29 GMT+03:00 Todd Lipcon <todd@cloudera.com>:
>
>> I tried to reproduce this locally using your code and couldn't. I get
>> around 100K inserts/second for 1.0, 1.1, 1.2, and 1.3 clients (against a
>> 1.4-SNAPSHOT cluster)
>>
>> Is it always reproducible for you? eg if you switch back to the earlier
>> client and try another set of runs, do you get the same results?
>>
>> -Todd
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 10:56 AM, Todd Lipcon <todd@cloudera.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I vaguely recall some bug in earlier versions of the Java client where
>>> 'shutdown' wouldn't properly block on the data being flushed. So it's
>>> possible in 1.0.x and below, you're not actually measuring the full amount
>>> of time to write all the data, whereas when the bug is fixed, you are.
>>>
>>> I'll see if I can repro this locally as well using your code.
>>>
>>> -Todd
>>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 10:49 AM, David Alves <davidralves@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Pavel
>>>>
>>>>   Interesting, Thanks for sharing those numbers.
>>>>   I assume you weren't using AUTOFLUSH_BACKGROUND for the first
>>>> versions you tested (don't think it was available then iirc).
>>>>   Could you try without in the last version and see how the numbers
>>>> compare?
>>>>   We'd be happy to help track down the reason for this perf regression.
>>>>
>>>> Best
>>>> David
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 4:58 AM, Pavel Martynov <mr.xkurt@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi, I ran into the fact that I can not achieve high insertion speed
>>>>> and I start to experiment with https://github.com/cloude
>>>>> ra/kudu-examples/tree/master/java/insert-loadgen.
>>>>> My slightly modified code (recreation of table on startup + duration
>>>>> measuring): https://gist.github.com/xkrt/9405a2eeb98a56288b7
>>>>> c5a7d817097b4.
>>>>> On every run I change kudu-client version, results:
>>>>>
>>>>> kudu-client-ver  perf
>>>>> 0.10             Duration: 626 ms, 79872/sec
>>>>> 1.0.0            Duration: 622 ms, 80385 inserts/sec
>>>>> 1.0.1            Duration: 630 ms, 79365 inserts/sec
>>>>> 1.1.0            Duration: 11703 ms, 4272 inserts/sec
>>>>> 1.3.1            Duration: 12317 ms, 4059 inserts/sec
>>>>>
>>>>> As can you see there was a great degradation between 1.0.1 and 1.1.0
>>>>> (about a ~20 times!).
>>>>> What could be a problem, how can I fix it? (actually I interested in
>>>>> kudu-spark, so probably using of kudu-client 1.0.1 is not right solution?).
>>>>>
>>>>> My test cluster: 3 hosts with master and tserver on each (3 masters
>>>>> and 3 tservers overall).
>>>>> No extra settings, flags used:
>>>>> fs_wal_dir
>>>>> fs_data_dirs
>>>>> master_addresses
>>>>> tserver_master_addrs
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> with best regards, Pavel Martynov
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Todd Lipcon
>>> Software Engineer, Cloudera
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Todd Lipcon
>> Software Engineer, Cloudera
>>
>
>
>
> --
> with best regards, Pavel Martynov
>



-- 
with best regards, Pavel Martynov

Mime
View raw message