Yup deleting the data on version change removes the issue. Sent from my iPhone
> On 12 May 2017, at 20:54, Clebert Suconic <[email protected]> wrote: > > Can you cleanup your data (as a test only?) rm -rf data. > > > > > perhaps the spikes you have is the compacting running? > > On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 3:51 PM, Michael André Pearce > <[email protected]> wrote: >> All I'm doing is changing Artemis.profile of the instance to the different >> versions. >> >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >>> On 12 May 2017, at 20:35, nigro_franz <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Too strange...have you tried with NIO too?It uses always the same buffer to >>> batch writes AFAIK.... >>> >>> 2017-05-12 21:30 GMT+02:00 Michael André Pearce [via ActiveMQ] < >>> [email protected]>: >>> >>>> Ok so it isn't the times buffer changes. Just deployed 2.1.0 with and >>>> without the timed buffer changes. Running the same tests no difference. >>>> >>>> Must be something else. Causing the behaviour change. >>>> >>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>> >>>>> On 12 May 2017, at 18:10, Michael André Pearce <[hidden email] >>>> <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=4726091&i=0>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I've left for the day now. If I get time over the weekend I'll try see >>>> if I can make a build of 2.1.0 without that change and see if it makes any >>>> difference. >>>>> >>>>> Can someone point me to the PR for that change, so I know what I'm >>>> unpicking locally? >>>>> >>>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>>> >>>>>> On 12 May 2017, at 17:58, Clebert Suconic <[hidden email] >>>> <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=4726091&i=1>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> As the only thing that could affect this is the Change on timed buffer. >>>>>> Afaik >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 12:57 PM Clebert Suconic <[hidden email] >>>> <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=4726091&i=2>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I'm considering only keeping the pooled buffer part and switch back to >>>> the >>>>>>> ole sleep or an improved sleep we had. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 12:49 PM Michael André Pearce < >>>>>>> [hidden email] <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=4726091&i=3>> >>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> As it seems I can't send images to mail list, just sent to you both >>>> via >>>>>>>> email. Some graphs we have comparing versions. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Not sure what changes might cause it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 12 May 2017, at 17:37, Clebert Suconic <[hidden email] >>>> <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=4726091&i=4>> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> There is a class we use on producer. TokenLimiter. Perhaps you >>>> could >>>>>>>>> reuse that one ? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 11:00 AM nigro_franz <[hidden email] >>>> <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=4726091&i=5>> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I was thinking of a similar solution but I've discovered that >>>> couldn't >>>>>>>> work >>>>>>>>>> (in the old or the new TimedBuffer too), because of the >>>>>>>>>> TimedBuffer::checkSize method that could force a flush if the batch >>>>>>>> buffer >>>>>>>>>> if not big enough to receive new data, going IOPS. >>>>>>>>>> Sadly TimedBuffer::checkSize is outside any timeout, but depends on >>>> the >>>>>>>>>> writers. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> That's why I've implemented the "compensation" right after any >>>> flush, >>>>>>>> in >>>>>>>>>> order to work with forced flushes too: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> https://github.com/franz1981/activemq-artemis/blob/ >>>> 4b831021dab3e0dd276f477e3ea665e11ab54d0e/artemis-journal/ >>>> src/main/java/org/apache/activemq/artemis/core/io/ >>>> buffer/TimedBuffer.java#L338 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Doing it on TimedBuffer::flush all the flushes on disk will be >>>>>>>> compensated >>>>>>>>>> (half of the story: ASYNCIO is async so depends on libAIO >>>> partially!) >>>>>>>>>> Regarding the IOPS computation I've built this, as you've >>>> suggested: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> https://github.com/franz1981/activemq-artemis/blob/ >>>> 4b831021dab3e0dd276f477e3ea665e11ab54d0e/artemis-journal/ >>>> src/main/java/org/apache/activemq/artemis/core/io/ >>>> buffer/TimedBuffer.java#L119 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The performance seems pretty good, it compensates well but it is >>>> faster >>>>>>>>>> than >>>>>>>>>> the original version, limiting IOPS too! >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>> Franz >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> View this message in context: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/DISCUSS-Artemis- >>>> IOPS-Limiter-strategy-tp4725875p4726057.html >>>>>>>>>> Sent from the ActiveMQ - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> Clebert Suconic >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Clebert Suconic >>>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Clebert Suconic >>>> >>>> >>>> ------------------------------ >>>> If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion >>>> below: >>>> http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/DISCUSS-Artemis- >>>> IOPS-Limiter-strategy-tp4725875p4726091.html >>>> To unsubscribe from [DISCUSS] Artemis IOPS Limiter strategy, click here >>>> <http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=unsubscribe_by_code&node=4725875&code=bmlncm8uZnJhQGdtYWlsLmNvbXw0NzI1ODc1fC0zNzI3NjE2NQ==> >>>> . >>>> NAML >>>> <http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=macro_viewer&id=instant_html%21nabble%3Aemail.naml&base=nabble.naml.namespaces.BasicNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NabbleNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NodeNamespace&breadcrumbs=notify_subscribers%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-instant_emails%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-send_instant_email%21nabble%3Aemail.naml> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> View this message in context: >>> http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/DISCUSS-Artemis-IOPS-Limiter-strategy-tp4725875p4726093.html >>> Sent from the ActiveMQ - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > > -- > Clebert Suconic
