[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-17072?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Andrew Purtell updated HBASE-17072:
-----------------------------------
    Fix Version/s: 0.98.24

> CPU usage starts to climb up to 90-100% when using G1GC; purge ThreadLocal 
> usage
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HBASE-17072
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-17072
>             Project: HBase
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: Performance, regionserver
>    Affects Versions: 1.0.0, 2.0.0, 1.2.0
>            Reporter: Eiichi Sato
>            Assignee: Eiichi Sato
>            Priority: Critical
>             Fix For: 2.0.0, 1.4.0, 0.98.24
>
>         Attachments: HBASE-17072-0.98.patch, HBASE-17072.branch-1.001.patch, 
> HBASE-17072.master.001.patch, HBASE-17072.master.002.patch, 
> HBASE-17072.master.003.patch, HBASE-17072.master.004.patch, 
> HBASE-17072.master.005.patch, HBASE-17072.master.005.patch, 
> disable-block-header-cache.patch, mat-threadlocals.png, mat-threads.png, 
> metrics.png, slave1.svg, slave2.svg, slave3.svg, slave4.svg
>
>
> h5. Problem
> CPU usage of a region server in our CDH 5.4.5 cluster, at some point, starts 
> to gradually get higher up to nearly 90-100% when using G1GC.  We've also run 
> into this problem on CDH 5.7.3 and CDH 5.8.2.
> In our production cluster, it normally takes a few weeks for this to happen 
> after restarting a RS.  We reproduced this on our test cluster and attached 
> the results.  Please note that, to make it easy to reproduce, we did some 
> "anti-tuning" on a table when running tests.
> In metrics.png, soon after we started running some workloads against a test 
> cluster (CDH 5.8.2) at about 7 p.m. CPU usage of the two RSs started to rise. 
>  Flame Graphs (slave1.svg to slave4.svg) are generated from jstack dumps of 
> each RS process around 10:30 a.m. the next day.
> After investigating heapdumps from another occurrence on a test cluster 
> running CDH 5.7.3, we found that the ThreadLocalMap contain a lot of 
> contiguous entries of {{HFileBlock$PrefetchedHeader}} probably due to primary 
> clustering.  This caused more loops in 
> {{ThreadLocalMap#expungeStaleEntries()}}, consuming a certain amount of CPU 
> time.  What is worse is that the method is called from RPC metrics code, 
> which means even a small amount of per-RPC time soon adds up to a huge amount 
> of CPU time.
> This is very similar to the issue in HBASE-16616, but we have many 
> {{HFileBlock$PrefetchedHeader}} not only {{Counter$IndexHolder}} instances.  
> Here are some OQL counts from Eclipse Memory Analyzer (MAT).  This shows a 
> number of ThreadLocal instances in the ThreadLocalMap of a single handler 
> thread.
> {code}
> SELECT *
> FROM OBJECTS (SELECT AS RETAINED SET OBJECTS value
>                         FROM OBJECTS 0x4ee380430) obj
> WHERE obj.@clazz.@name = 
> "org.apache.hadoop.hbase.io.hfile.HFileBlock$PrefetchedHeader"
> #=> 10980 instances
> {code}
> {code}
> SELECT *
> FROM OBJECTS (SELECT AS RETAINED SET OBJECTS value
>                         FROM OBJECTS 0x4ee380430) obj
> WHERE obj.@clazz.@name = "org.apache.hadoop.hbase.util.Counter$IndexHolder"
> #=> 2052 instances
> {code}
> Although as described in HBASE-16616 this somewhat seems to be an issue in 
> G1GC side regarding weakly-reachable objects, we should keep ThreadLocal 
> usage minimal and avoid creating an indefinite number (in this case, a number 
> of HFiles) of ThreadLocal instances.
> HBASE-16146 removes ThreadLocals from the RPC metrics code.  That may solve 
> the issue (I just saw the patch, never tested it at all), but the 
> {{HFileBlock$PrefetchedHeader}} are still there in the ThreadLocalMap, which 
> may cause issues in the future again.
> h5. Our Solution
> We simply removed the whole {{HFileBlock$PrefetchedHeader}} caching and 
> fortunately we didn't notice any performance degradation for our production 
> workloads.
> Because the PrefetchedHeader caching uses ThreadLocal and because RPCs are 
> handled randomly in any of the handlers, small Get or small Scan RPCs do not 
> benefit from the caching (See HBASE-10676 and HBASE-11402 for the details).  
> Probably, we need to see how well reads are saved by the caching for large 
> Scan or Get RPCs and especially for compactions if we really remove the 
> caching. It's probably better if we can remove ThreadLocals without breaking 
> the current caching behavior.
> FWIW, I'm attaching the patch we applied. It's for CDH 5.4.5.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Reply via email to