I synced with Rafael. Below is summary of discussion. This quota is CreateRequestsPerMinutePerUser and it has 60 requests per user by default.
I've created Jira [BEAM-5053]( https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-5053) for this. I see following options we can utilize: 1. Add retry logic. Although this limits us to 1 dataflow job start per second for whole Jenkins. In long scale this can also block one test job if other jobs take all the slots. 2. Utilize different users to spin Dataflow jobs. 3. Find way to rise quota limit on Dataflow. By default the field limits value to 60 requests per minute. 4. Long run generic suggestion: limit amount of dataflow jobs we spin up and move tests to the form of unit or component tests. Please, fill in any insights or ideas you have on this. Regards, --Mikhail Have feedback <http://go/migryz-feedback>? On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 3:55 PM Mikhail Gryzykhin <mig...@google.com> wrote: > Hi Everyone, > > Seems that we hit quota issue again: > https://builds.apache.org/job/beam_PostCommit_Go_GradleBuild/553/consoleFull > > Can someone share information on how was this triaged last time or guide > me on possible follow-up actions? > > Regards, > --Mikhail > > Have feedback <http://go/migryz-feedback>? > > > On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 9:12 PM Rafael Fernandez <rfern...@google.com> > wrote: > >> Summary for all folks following this story -- and many thanks for >> explaining configs to me and pointing me to files and such. >> >> - Scott made changes to the config and we can now run 3 >> ValidatesRunner.Dataflow in parallel (each run is about 2 hours) >> - With the latest quota changes, we peaked at ~70% capacity in concurrent >> Dataflow jobs when running those >> - I've been keeping an eye on quota peaks for all resources today and >> have not seen any worryisome limits overall. >> - Also note there are improvements planned to the >> ValidatesRunner.Dataflow test so various items get batched and the test >> itself runs faster -- I believe it's on Alan's radar >> >> Cheers, >> r >> >> On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 4:23 PM Rafael Fernandez <rfern...@google.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Done! >>> >>> On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 4:10 PM Scott Wegner <sc...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>>> Hey Rafael, looks like we need more 'INSTANCE_TEMPLATES' quota [1]. Can >>>> you take a look? I've filed [BEAM-4722]: >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-4722 >>>> >>>> [1] https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/5861#issuecomment-401963630 >>>> >>>> On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 11:33 AM Rafael Fernandez <rfern...@google.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> OK, Scott just sent https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/5860 . Quotas >>>>> should not be a problem, if they are, please file a JIRA under gcp-quota. >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> r >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 10:06 AM Kenneth Knowles <k...@google.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> One thing that is nice when you do this is to be able to share your >>>>>> results. Though if all you are sharing is "they passed" then I guess we >>>>>> don't have to insist on evidence. >>>>>> >>>>>> Kenn >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 9:25 AM Scott Wegner <sc...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> A few thoughts: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> * The Jenkins job getting backed up >>>>>>> is beam_PostCommit_Java_ValidatesRunner_Dataflow_Gradle_PR [1]. Since >>>>>>> Mikhail refactored Jenkins jobs, this only runs when explicitly >>>>>>> requested >>>>>>> via "Run Dataflow ValidatesRunner", and only has 8 total runs. So this >>>>>>> job >>>>>>> is idle more often than backlogged. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> * It's difficult to reason about our exact quota needs because >>>>>>> Dataflow jobs get launched from various Jenkins jobs that have different >>>>>>> parallelism configurations. If we have budget, we could enable >>>>>>> concurrent >>>>>>> execution of this job and increase our quota enough to give some >>>>>>> breathing >>>>>>> room. If we do this, I recommend limiting the max concurrency via >>>>>>> throttleConcurrentBuilds [2] to some reasonable limit. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> * This test suite is meant to be an exhaustive post-commit >>>>>>> validation of Dataflow runner, and tests a lot of different aspects of a >>>>>>> runner. It would be more efficient to run locally only the tests >>>>>>> affected >>>>>>> by your change. Note that this requires having access to a GCP project >>>>>>> with >>>>>>> billing, but most Dataflow developers probably have access to this >>>>>>> already. >>>>>>> The command for this is: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ./gradlew :beam-runners-google-cloud-dataflow-java:validatesRunner >>>>>>> -PdataflowProject=myGcpProject -PdataflowTempRoot=gs://myGcsTempRoot >>>>>>> --tests "org.apache.beam.MyTestClass" >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [1] >>>>>>> https://builds.apache.org/job/beam_PostCommit_Java_ValidatesRunner_Dataflow_Gradle_PR/buildTimeTrend >>>>>>> [2] >>>>>>> https://jenkinsci.github.io/job-dsl-plugin/#method/javaposse.jobdsl.dsl.jobs.FreeStyleJob.throttleConcurrentBuilds >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 8:33 AM Lukasz Cwik <lc...@google.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The validates runner test parallelism is controlled here and is >>>>>>>> currently set to be "unlimited": >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/beam/blob/fbfe6ceaea9d99cb1c8964087aafaa2bc2297a03/runners/google-cloud-dataflow-java/build.gradle#L115 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Each test fork is run on a different gradle worker, so the number >>>>>>>> of parallel test runs is limited to the max number of workers >>>>>>>> configured >>>>>>>> which is controlled here: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/beam/blob/fbfe6ceaea9d99cb1c8964087aafaa2bc2297a03/.test-infra/jenkins/job_PostCommit_Java_ValidatesRunner_Dataflow.groovy#L50 >>>>>>>> It is currently configured to 3 * number of CPU cores. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> We are already running up to 48 Dataflow jobs in parallel. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Sat, Jun 30, 2018 at 9:51 AM Rafael Fernandez < >>>>>>>> rfern...@google.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> - How many resources to ValidatesRunner tests use? >>>>>>>>> - Where are those settings? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Sat, Jun 30, 2018 at 9:50 AM Reuven Lax <re...@google.com> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The specific issue only affects Dataflow ValidatesRunner tests. >>>>>>>>>> We currently allow only one of these to run at a time, to control >>>>>>>>>> usage of >>>>>>>>>> Dataflow and of GCE quota. Other types of tests do not suffer from >>>>>>>>>> this >>>>>>>>>> issue. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I would like to see if it's possible to increase Dataflow quota >>>>>>>>>> so we can run more of these in parallel. It took me 8 hours end to >>>>>>>>>> end to >>>>>>>>>> run these tests (about 6 hours for the run to be scheduled). If >>>>>>>>>> there was a >>>>>>>>>> failure, I would have had to repeat the whole process. In the worst >>>>>>>>>> case, >>>>>>>>>> this process could have taken me days. While this is not as pressing >>>>>>>>>> as >>>>>>>>>> some other issues (as most people don't need to run the Dataflow >>>>>>>>>> tests on >>>>>>>>>> every PR), fixing it would make such changes much easier to manage. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Reuven >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Jun 30, 2018 at 9:32 AM Rafael Fernandez < >>>>>>>>>> rfern...@google.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> +Reuven Lax <re...@google.com> told me yesterday that he was >>>>>>>>>>> waiting for some test to be scheduled and run, and it took 6 hours >>>>>>>>>>> or so. I >>>>>>>>>>> would like to help reduce these wait times by increasing >>>>>>>>>>> parallelism. I >>>>>>>>>>> need help understanding the continuous minimum of what we use. It >>>>>>>>>>> seems the >>>>>>>>>>> following is true: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> - There seems to always be 16 jenkins machines on (16 CPUs >>>>>>>>>>> each) >>>>>>>>>>> - There seems to be three GKE machines always on (1 CPU each) >>>>>>>>>>> - Most (if not all) unit tests run on 1 machine, and seem to >>>>>>>>>>> run one-at-a-time <-- I think we can safely parallelize this to >>>>>>>>>>> 20. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> With current quotas, if we parallelize to 20 concurrent unit >>>>>>>>>>> tests, we still have room for 80 other concurrent dataflow jobs to >>>>>>>>>>> execute, >>>>>>>>>>> with 75% of CPU capacity. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts? Additional data? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>> r >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
