[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-7546?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14069666#comment-14069666
 ] 

graham sanderson commented on CASSANDRA-7546:
---------------------------------------------

Alternatively if you are saying, let each thread keep working while they still 
believe they can win, or while they have something to do that can be reused if 
they lose, then maybe give them one last shot to try again if they lose and 
haven't done anything reusable, then make them block... I'm okay with that. (of 
course on 2.0.x. today, that pretty much boils down to your patch!)

> AtomicSortedColumns.addAllWithSizeDelta has a spin loop that allocates memory
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CASSANDRA-7546
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-7546
>             Project: Cassandra
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: Core
>            Reporter: graham sanderson
>            Assignee: graham sanderson
>         Attachments: 7546.20.txt, 7546.20_2.txt, 7546.20_alt.txt, 
> suggestion1.txt, suggestion1_21.txt
>
>
> In order to preserve atomicity, this code attempts to read, clone/update, 
> then CAS the state of the partition.
> Under heavy contention for updating a single partition this can cause some 
> fairly staggering memory growth (the more cores on your machine the worst it 
> gets).
> Whilst many usage patterns don't do highly concurrent updates to the same 
> partition, hinting today, does, and in this case wild (order(s) of magnitude 
> more than expected) memory allocation rates can be seen (especially when the 
> updates being hinted are small updates to different partitions which can 
> happen very fast on their own) - see CASSANDRA-7545
> It would be best to eliminate/reduce/limit the spinning memory allocation 
> whilst not slowing down the very common un-contended case.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)

Reply via email to