[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDDS-9446?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17775846#comment-17775846
 ] 

Ritesh Shukla commented on HDDS-9446:
-------------------------------------

cc [~xBis] [~georgehdd]

> S3 default GRPC transport doesn't utilize enough parallelism on OM server-side
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HDDS-9446
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDDS-9446
>             Project: Apache Ozone
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: OM, S3
>            Reporter: Duong
>            Priority: Major
>              Labels: performance
>
> GRPC is enabled by default as the transport between S3->OM, as per HDDS-7309.
> We did a S3 GET stress test using warp in a cluster and realized that with 
> GRPC transport, S3 can't invoke enough parallelism in OM. We tested with more 
> than 300 warp client threads spread on 15 S3 instances, but OM doesn't use up 
> to more than 15 threads concurrently (we use the metric added by HDDS-9424 to 
> access).  
>  
> {code:java}
> warp get --warp-client=1.1.1.{34...49}  --host=localhost:9879 --tls  
> --insecure --access-key=hdfs/[email protected] 
> --secret-key=ada0758fe2d12a55dbea8ff6b7df52c377bf46a8e2886d6d17fae5b77a7c4380 
> --obj.size=1kb --concurrent=20  --bucket bucket-obs {code}
> And this has caused a degradation (30%) in S3->OM performance.
> It's also verified that switching back to HadoopRPC3 did utilize 100 threads 
> in OM RPC server and brought back the performance before. 
> I think this is purely a problem with GRPC default configs. 
> We need to either tune GRPC default configs, or make HadoopRPC the default 
> transport.
> cc. [~xBis] [~ritesh]
>  



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to