[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-620?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12798612#action_12798612
 ] 

Roger Binns commented on COUCHDB-620:
-------------------------------------

There is no parallelizing at all.  My comment does say that :-)

Although doing it in parallel (or by number of CPU cores) will improve things, 
there is still lots more to be done.  (Going from 4 hours to 2 hours is still 
far too long.)  The various latencies add up a lot.  While CouchDB is 
considering which document to get view info for next, the couchjs process is 
sitting there idle.  While couchjs is processing a doc, CouchDB sits there 
idle.  Each side doing work while the other side is also working will 
significantly reduce the latencies and increase document processing throughput.

> Generating views is extremely slow - makes CouchDB hard to use with 
> non-trivial number of docs
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: COUCHDB-620
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-620
>             Project: CouchDB
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Infrastructure
>    Affects Versions: 0.10
>         Environment: Ubuntu 9.10 64 bit, CouchDB 0.10
>            Reporter: Roger Binns
>
> Generating views is extremely slow.  For example adding 10 million documents 
> takes less than 10 minutes but generating some simple views on the same docs 
> takes over 4 hours.
> Using top you can see that CouchDB (erlang) and couchjs between them cannot 
> even saturate a single CPU let alone the I/O system.  Under ideal conditions 
> performance should be limited by cpu, disk or memory.  This implies that the 
> processes are doing simple things in lockstep accumulating latencies in each 
> process as well as the communication between them which when multiplied by 
> the number of documents can amount to a lot.
> Some suggestions:
> * Run as many couchjs instances as there are processor cores and scatter work 
> amongst them
> * Have some sort of pipelining in the erlang so that the moment the first 
> byte of response is received from couchjs the data is sent for the next 
> request (the JSON conversion, HTTP headers etc should all have been assembled 
> already) to reduce latencies.  Do whatever is most similar in couchjs (eg use 
> separate threads to read requests, process them and write responses).
> * Use the equivalent of HTTP pipelining when talking to couchjs so that it 
> always has a doc ready to work on rather than having to transmit an entire 
> response and then wait for erlang to think and provide an entire new request
> A simple test of success is to have a database with a million or so documents 
> with a trivial view and have view creation max out the CPU,. memory or disk.
> Some things in CouchDB make this a particularly nasty problem.  View data is 
> not replicated so replicating documents can lead the view data by a large 
> margin on the recipient database.  This can lead to inconsistencies.  You 
> also can't expect users to then wait minutes (or hours) for a request to 
> complete because the view generation got that far behind.  (My own plans now 
> are to not use replication and instead create the database file on another 
> couchdb instance and then rsync the binary database file over instead!)
> Although stale=ok is available, you still have no idea if the response will 
> be quick or take however long view generation does.  (Sure I could add some 
> sort of timeout and complicate the code but then what value do I pick?  If I 
> have a user waiting I want an answer ASAP or I have to give them some 
> horrible error message.  Taking a long wait and then giving a timeout is even 
> worse!)

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

Reply via email to