Thanks for explaining.

Sounds good to me.

256 should be 256 MB.

Best,
Jingsong

On Tue, Apr 25, 2023 at 3:03 PM Shammon FY <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi Jingsong & Guojun
>
> Users can config SINK_MANAGED_WRITER_BUFFER_WEIGHT in sql job, for example
> `INSERT INTO paimon_table
> /*+ OPTIONS('sink.use-managed-memory-allocator'='true',
> 'sink.managed.writer-buffer-weight'='256') */ SELECT ... FROM ...;`
>
> Flink will calculate the memory of Managed Memory based on the weights of
> 70, 70, and 30 for the Operator, Statebackend, and Python according to the
> requirements. After that, Flink normalizes the weight of each specific
> operator and recalculates the operator's memory from the Operator Managed
> Memory.
>
> Users can config agg/sort operator weight for Flink Batch jobs with options
> `table.exec.resource.hash-agg.memory`,
> `table.exec.resource.hash-join.memory` and
> `table.exec.resource.sort.memory`, the default weights for them are 128.
> For window operators in Flink Streaming jobs, there are const weights with
> value 100.
>
> Compared to these operators, I think it's sufficient to use default weight
> 256 for sink operator. If the writer buffer is out of memory, users need to
> increase the managed memory size. We can clearly describe it in the
> document.
>
> Best,
> Shammon FY
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 25, 2023 at 12:22 PM Jingsong Li <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Looks good to me!
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 25, 2023 at 12:12 PM Shammon FY <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Jingsong
> > >
> > > I agree with you that from a performance perspective there is indeed no
> > > need to create segments for Paimon based on Flink segments. If we convert
> > > Flink MemorySegment to Paimon directly, I think we should remove the
> > `free`
> > > method in Paimon's `MemorySegment`:
> > > 1. As you mentioned above, Paimon won't free segment
> > > 2. Avoid users mistakenly calling free method to duplicate release
> > off-heap
> > > memory
> > >
> > > In addition, we need to declare in the Paimon's MemorySegment that
> > off-heap
> > > memory needs to be allocated and released by the engine. What do you
> > think?
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Shammon FY
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Apr 25, 2023 at 9:53 AM Jingsong Li <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > About Guojun's concerns,
> > > >
> > > > How to configure SINK_MANAGED_WRITER_BUFFER_WEIGHT?
> > > > How does it allocate memory with sort and agg? What is the best value
> > to
> > > > assign?
> > > >
> > > > > users can configure managed memory weights for AGG and window
> > operators
> > > > for Flink jobs
> > > >
> > > > How to?
> > > >
> > > > I think we can add more explanation.
> > > >
> > > > Best,
> > > > Jingsong
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Apr 25, 2023 at 9:46 AM Jingsong Li <[email protected]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Shammon,
> > > > >
> > > > > But nobody released the Paimon MemorySegment.
> > > > >
> > > > > I think we can have a clear definition here, Flink's memory is
> > managed
> > > > by Flink.
> > > > >
> > > > > The introduction of interface here has a big impact on performance,
> > > > > and Flink did a lot of testing and optimization early on to avoid
> > > > > interface invoking as much as possible.
> > > > >
> > > > > Best,
> > > > > Jingsong
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sun, Apr 23, 2023 at 5:51 PM Shammon FY <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks for all the feedbacks.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > To Jingsong
> > > > > > > Maybe we can just use some reflection method to get
> > offHeapBuffer and
> > > > > > heapMemory from Flink MemorySegment.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Yes, we can indeed construct a MemorySegment for Paimon in this
> > way,
> > > > but
> > > > > > this method may have duplicate release issues for the segment.
> > Assuming
> > > > > > Flink has applied for an off-heap memory, Paimon gets the off-heap
> > > > buffer
> > > > > > and creates its MemorySegment, then the off-heap buffer will be in
> > > > Flink
> > > > > > MemorySegment and Paimon MemorySegment. When the off-heap buffer is
> > > > > > released in Paimon with `UNSAFE.freeMemory(this.address)`, it may
> > be
> > > > > > released again in Flink's MemorySegment.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > To Liming
> > > > > > > Is it possible to cause a deadlock when requesting for memory
> > from
> > > > the
> > > > > > engine's managed memory? Is it necessary to add some memory
> > checking or
> > > > > > timeout mechanism here?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Flink allocates segments for parallel tasks in MemoryManager. When
> > the
> > > > > > usage of memory in MemoryManager hits the limit, it will throw
> > > > Exception
> > > > > >
> > > > > > To Guojun
> > > > > > > One question I'm thinking about is that will this increase the
> > bar of
> > > > > > writing performance maintenance on Paimon? Like how to decide an
> > > > > > appropriate memory weight for users' writing jobs.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Currently, users can configure managed memory weights for AGG and
> > > > window
> > > > > > operators for Flink jobs, this is similar to the writer buffer pool
> > > > weight
> > > > > > configured in Paimon. So for Flink users, I think this will not be
> > a
> > > > > > problem.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > Shammon FY
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Apr 21, 2023 at 11:42 AM Guojun Li <
> > [email protected]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi Shammon,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thank you for writing up the proposal. It's great to introduce
> > this
> > > > unified
> > > > > > > memory management for Paimon!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > One question I'm thinking about is that will this increase the
> > bar of
> > > > > > > writing performance maintenance on Paimon? Like how to decide an
> > > > > > > appropriate memory weight for users' writing jobs.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > Guojun
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 20, 2023 at 8:45 PM Ming Li <[email protected]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks Shammon for the proposal.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > For me it is more appropriate to leave the memory management
> > to the
> > > > > > > > computing engine.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > But I have a small question about this proposal. If the
> > engine's
> > > > memory
> > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > not configured properly, is it possible to cause a deadlock
> > when
> > > > > > > requesting
> > > > > > > > for memory from the engine's managed memory? Is it necessary to
> > > > add some
> > > > > > > > memory checking or timeout mechanism here?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > Ming Li
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Shammon FY <[email protected]> 于2023年4月19日周三 09:57写道:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hi devs:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I would like to start a discussion of PIP-1: Improve Shared
> > > > Writer
> > > > > > > Buffer
> > > > > > > > > Pool For Sink [1]. Currently Paimon sink task creates a heap
> > > > memory
> > > > > > > pool
> > > > > > > > > which is shared by writers. When there are multiple tasks in
> > an
> > > > > > > Executor,
> > > > > > > > > it may cause FullGC, performance issues and even OOM.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > This PIP aims to improve the buffer pool for writers in
> > Paimon
> > > > tasks.
> > > > > > > > > Paimon tasks can create memory pools based on Executor Memory
> > > > which
> > > > > > > will
> > > > > > > > be
> > > > > > > > > managed by Executor, such as Managed Memory in Flink
> > > > TaskManager. It
> > > > > > > will
> > > > > > > > > improve the stability and performance of sinks by managing
> > writer
> > > > > > > buffers
> > > > > > > > > for multiple tasks through Executor.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Looking forward to your feedback, thanks.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > [1]
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > >
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/PAIMON/PIP-1%3A+Improve+Shared+Writer+Buffer+Pool+For+Sink
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > > > > Shammon FY
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > >
> >

Reply via email to