Hi Supun & Supun :) This is good discussion. I think we need to balance both aspects here. I am not at all favoring shoehorning into mongodb and again spend few months addressing the unknowns. On the other hand, GSoC is the right time to explore alternatives.
My expectation from this document was not so much of criticizing the current JPA based implementation. Back then the focus was to adopt thrift for the data models (thanks Supun K for the recommendation). Among other things, thrift helped us to keep the focus on airavata’s core capabilities and quickly unify all the legacy interfaces. The currently JPA registry was developed from scratch in a hurry to help with thrift adoption. I think it did well and exceeded initial expectations. We now slowly circled through all the components and made tremendous progress. We reduced the internal footprint significantly (rabbitmq in favor of WS Messenger, work queues in place of custom co-ordination in workflow interpreter and so forth). I think its time to step back and re-look at the metadata management needs. How about we not worry on the implementation costs and focus on what criteria we should look into potential solutions and how to profile them? We should also include the full JPA based implementation as one of the candidates. As both of you said, its important to identify the profiling criteria. Chathuri has early work on this, in both the survey paper and performance measurements, we probably should revisit them and build from there. Thanks, Suresh > On May 22, 2015, at 12:28 PM, Supun Nakandala <supun.nakand...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Hi Supun, > > On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 9:42 PM, Supun Kamburugamuve <supu...@gmail.com > <mailto:supu...@gmail.com>> wrote: > Hi Supun, > > In normal software developments, it is normal to have these kind of slowness. > We cannot foresee all the things when we develop. The solution is to improve > the performance of important operations rather than re-writing everything > from the beginning. For example for this particular select operations you can > directly use SQL rather than going through JPA. > > I'm pretty sure you'll encounter more problems, if you implement this in > MongoDB than in the current MySQL. If that happens, do you think abandoning > that technology and going for a new database will be a good solution? Now you > have more experience with MySQL than MongoDB as well. > > Rather than going to abandon everything you have because of one problem, > trying to fix it may be better for you in the long run. > > Thanks, > Supun.. > > I completely agree with you. Writing things from scratch will need more > development effort and proper testing. And has the potential of incorporating > new unknown issues. It is completely possible to fix these issues in current > registry and I have mentioned that in the doc also. > > In addition to that I also checked several other alternatives and found > MongoDB interesting. I am not saying that we should completely rewrite > registry using MongoDB. But I think it is worth exploring it at a POC level. > > On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 11:49 AM, Supun Nakandala <supun.nakand...@gmail.com > <mailto:supun.nakand...@gmail.com>> wrote: > Hi Supun, > > I haven't done done profiling of registry based operations. Here what I mean > by slow performance is mainly the slowness of the SELECT operations in PHP > Reference Gateway. e.g fetching Projects, fetching experiments. Even a simple > query to fetch the 20 most recent experiments is embarrassingly slow in PGA. > > Even though I didn't do a proper profiling of operations I did a query log > analysis for a SELECT experiment query. This was a simple query to fetch 20 > most recent experiments. I found that JPA layer is generating enormous amount > of queries for this task rather than one single query (due to the select N+1 > isssue). This issue is same for fetching a single experiment by specifying > the id. > > I think it is ok to say that current registry has become bottleneck for most > of the PGA specific operations. But I don't have evidence to show how it has > become a bottleneck for the Orchestrator or GFac specific operations. For > that as you have mentioned we need to profile the operations. But I think the > argument is still valid even for GFac and Orchestrator based operations. > > I have attached the query log for the above mentioned select operation here > with. If you observe the query log you can see that every associated entity > is fetched separately using complex join operations. > > > > On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 8:05 PM, Supun Kamburugamuve <supu...@gmail.com > <mailto:supu...@gmail.com>> wrote: > Hi Supun, > > In your report it says Slow performance. Do you have any data about this slow > performance? For a typical request in what percent the registry slow down the > processing compared to overall time it takes to execute that request? > > Do you have a use case where registry is the bottleneck? > > Thanks, > Supun.. > > On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 9:45 AM, Suresh Marru <sma...@apache.org > <mailto:sma...@apache.org>> wrote: > Hi Supun, > > This is very good analysis, you have nicely embraced the problem. Before we > jump into the solution, we may want to do small POC’s to validate your > claims. > > Thank you for getting a headstart, this also cuts into GSoC goals of > Douglas’s project. So lets work on this collaboratively. > > Hi Madhu, > > Can you please provide guidance on this effort on how to academically > approach the data management challenges of Airavata. The students might > appreciate insights on how to profile and benchmark any possible solutions. > > Cheers, > Suresh > >> On May 22, 2015, at 9:18 AM, Supun Nakandala <supun.nakand...@gmail.com >> <mailto:supun.nakand...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> Hi Devs, >> >> I have compiled a document based on the analysis I did on current registry >> architecture/technology and possible modification and alternatives. You can >> find the document at >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1XWAQLtdtCf9nTigAz6r5JINHR99bP0oeYaTgeEIVr4w/edit# >> >> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1XWAQLtdtCf9nTigAz6r5JINHR99bP0oeYaTgeEIVr4w/edit#> >> >> Thanks >> Supun > > > > > -- > Supun Kamburugamuva > Member, Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org > <http://www.apache.org/> > E-mail: supu...@gmail.com <mailto:supu...@gmail.com>; Mobile: +1 812 369 > 6762 <tel:%2B1%20812%20369%206762> > Blog: http://supunk.blogspot.com <http://supunk.blogspot.com/> > > > > > -- > Thank you > Supun Nakandala > Dept. Computer Science and Engineering > University of Moratuwa > > > > -- > Supun Kamburugamuva > Member, Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org > <http://www.apache.org/> > E-mail: supu...@gmail.com <mailto:supu...@gmail.com>; Mobile: +1 812 369 > 6762 <tel:%2B1%20812%20369%206762> > Blog: http://supunk.blogspot.com <http://supunk.blogspot.com/> > > > > > -- > Thank you > Supun Nakandala > Dept. Computer Science and Engineering > University of Moratuwa
