I have seen a similar thing from the OS tunable readahead. I think Linux
defaults to reading a full 128K into pagecache with every read. This is
sensible for spinning disks where maybe blowing 500us may mean you get
lucky and save a 10ms seek. But for SSDs, especially a key-value store
doing purely random access, it is a total waste and huge perf hit.

-Jay

On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 12:29 PM, Roger Hoover <roger.hoo...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> FYI, for Linux with SSDs, changing the io scheduler to deadline or noop can
> make a 500x improvement.  I haven't tried this myself.
>
>
> http://www.elasticsearch.org/guide/en/elasticsearch/guide/current/hardware.html#_disks
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:28 AM, Chris Riccomini <
> criccom...@linkedin.com.invalid> wrote:
>
> > Hey Roger,
> >
> > We did some benchmarking, and discovered very similar performance to what
> > you've described. We saw ~40k writes/sec, and ~20 k reads/sec,
> > per-container, on a Virident SSD. This was without any changelog. Are you
> > using a changelog on the store?
> >
> > When we attached a changelog to the store, the writes dropped
> > significantly (~1000 writes/sec). When we hooked up VisualVM, we saw that
> > the container was spending > 99% of its time in
> KafkaSystemProducer.send().
> >
> > We're currently doing two things:
> >
> > 1. Working with our performance team to understand and tune RocksDB
> > properly.
> > 2. Upgrading the Kafka producer to use the new Java-based API.
> (SAMZA-227)
> >
> > For (1), it seems like we should be able to get a lot higher throughput
> > from RocksDB. Anecdotally, we've heard that RocksDB requires many threads
> > in order to max out an SSD, and since Samza is single-threaded, we could
> > just be hitting a RocksDB bottleneck. We won't know until we dig into the
> > problem (which we started investigating last week). The current plan is
> to
> > start by benchmarking RocksDB JNI outside of Samza, and see what we can
> > get. From there, we'll know our "speed of light", and can try to get
> Samza
> > as close as possible to it. If RocksDB JNI can't be made to go "fast",
> > then we'll have to understand why.
> >
> > (2) should help with the changelog issue. I believe that the slowness
> with
> > the changelog is caused because the changelog is using a sync producer to
> > send to Kafka, and is blocking when a batch is flushed. In the new API,
> > the concept of a "sync" producer is removed. All writes are handled on an
> > async writer thread (though we can still guarantee writes are safely
> > written before checkpointing, which is what we need).
> >
> > In short, I agree, it seems slow. We see this behavior, too. We're
> digging
> > into it.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Chris
> >
> > On 1/17/15 12:58 PM, "Roger Hoover" <roger.hoo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >Michael,
> > >
> > >Thanks for the response.  I used VisualVM and YourKit and see the CPU is
> > >not being used (0.1%).  I took a few thread dumps and see the main
> thread
> > >blocked on the flush() method inside the KV store.
> > >
> > >On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 7:09 AM, Michael Rose <elementat...@gmail.com>
> > >wrote:
> > >
> > >> Is your process at 100% CPU? I suspect you're spending most of your
> > >>time in
> > >> JSON deserialization, but profile it and check.
> > >>
> > >> Michael
> > >>
> > >> On Friday, January 16, 2015, Roger Hoover <roger.hoo...@gmail.com>
> > >>wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Hi guys,
> > >> >
> > >> > I'm testing a job that needs to load 40M records (6GB in Kafka as
> > >>JSON)
> > >> > from a bootstrap topic.  The topic has 4 partitions and I'm running
> > >>the
> > >> job
> > >> > using the ProcessJobFactory so all four tasks are in one container.
> > >> >
> > >> > Using RocksDB, it's taking 19 minutes to load all the data which
> > >>amounts
> > >> to
> > >> > 35k records/sec or 5MB/s based on input size.  I ran iostat during
> > >>this
> > >> > time as see the disk write throughput is 14MB/s.
> > >> >
> > >> > I didn't tweak any of the storage settings.
> > >> >
> > >> > A few questions:
> > >> > 1) Does this seem low?  I'm running on a Macbook Pro with SSD.
> > >> > 2) Do you have any recommendations for improving the load speed?
> > >> >
> > >> > Thanks,
> > >> >
> > >> > Roger
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to