[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARTEMIS-3282?focusedWorklogId=595241&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:worklog-tabpanel#worklog-595241
]
ASF GitHub Bot logged work on ARTEMIS-3282:
-------------------------------------------
Author: ASF GitHub Bot
Created on: 12/May/21 11:58
Start Date: 12/May/21 11:58
Worklog Time Spent: 10m
Work Description: franz1981 commented on a change in pull request #3566:
URL: https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/3566#discussion_r630973519
##########
File path:
artemis-server/src/main/java/org/apache/activemq/artemis/core/replication/ReplicationEndpoint.java
##########
@@ -221,6 +221,8 @@ public void handlePacket(final Packet packet) {
handleCommitRollback((ReplicationCommitMessage) packet);
break;
case PacketImpl.REPLICATION_PAGE_WRITE:
+ // potential blocking I/O operation! flush existing packets to
save long tail latency
+ endOfBatch();
Review comment:
> I really don't see how a user can choose a value for
maxReplicaResponseBatchBytes
It can be 0 with users that care about 99.XXX percentile latencies and have
configured kernel bypass drivers.
It could be the MTU size for users that knows it, it should be -1 for
"common" users (right now I've chosen 1500 that's the typical MTU size).
I think is very low level config really, yet to be see how it can be
usefull: I'm still in the process of validating it before dropping the "draft"
status of the PR.
> I think it has to be automatic or automagical, based on the some limit on
what can be read.
From the point of view of network utilization and memory usage, just using
-1 or 1500 is already a huge step forward if compared with the "previous"
(pre-https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARTEMIS-2877) behaviour.
Size of Ethernet frame - 24 Bytes
Size of IPv4 Header (without any options) - 20 bytes
Size of TCP Header (without any options) - 20 Bytes
Total size of an Ethernet Frame carrying an IP Packet with an empty TCP
Segment - 24 + 20 + 20 = 64 bytes
When packet size is > MTU, the TCP packets are going to be fragmented, but
that's fine because it will amortize syscall cost instead, while maximizing
network usage too.
While just sending responses one by one means sending a ~3X overhead of data
for each response sent, that will hurt both latencies and CPU/network usage.
> I wonder if something similar based on confirmation-window could work here
No idea, IIRC the replication flow of packets won't obey any of the other
cluster connection channel packets flow rules, no duplicate checks/no
confirmation window or anything similar, @clebertsuconic can you confirm?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
Issue Time Tracking
-------------------
Worklog Id: (was: 595241)
Time Spent: 2h 40m (was: 2.5h)
> Expose Replication response batching tuning
> -------------------------------------------
>
> Key: ARTEMIS-3282
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARTEMIS-3282
> Project: ActiveMQ Artemis
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Francesco Nigro
> Assignee: Francesco Nigro
> Priority: Major
> Time Spent: 2h 40m
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
