Summary: cpnd: increase performance when creating large numbers of sections
[#770]
Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 770
Peer Reviewer(s): AVM
Pull request to: AVM
Affected branch(es): default
Development branch:
--------------------------------
Impacted area Impact y/n
--------------------------------
Docs n
Build system n
RPM/packaging n
Configuration files n
Startup scripts n
SAF services y
OpenSAF services n
Core libraries n
Samples n
Tests n
Other n
Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above):
---------------------------------------------
Please ignore the previous "fat-finger" submission.
changeset 6f9c8080657af783462c52d81137e41038aee6a6
Author: Alex Jones <ajo...@genband.com>
Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 17:03:25 -0400
cpnd: increase performance when creating large numbers of sections
[#770]
Jan 7 21:32:32.772347 <1789648919> ERR |MDTM: Frag recd is not next frag
so dropping adest=<0x010010023922604c> Jan 7 21:32:32.772399
<1789648919>
ERR |MDTM: Message is dropped as msg is out of seq TRANSPOR-
ID=<0x010010023922604c> With large numbers of sections (>5k) on the
standby
the CPU is pegged and all ckpt API functions return with
SA_AIS_ERR_TIMEOUT,
including ActiveReplicaSet, and CheckpointClose!
The section id database is implemented as a linked list. Each write to a
section must traverse the list in order to find the section. With
1000's of
sections this takes a looong time. Also, sync data being sent over is
too
large for one packet (30M). This causes the transport layer (in this
case
TIPC), to drop packets. Lastly, the SectionCreate message is not
asynchronous when ACTIVE_REPLICA is specified.
Solution is in 3 parts: (1) make the section id database a C++ STL map
for
fast access. (2) make MAX_SYNC_TRANSFER_SIZE much smaller: 3M instead of
30M. (3) SectionCreate message should be asynchronous when
ACTIVE_REPLICA is
specified.
Added Files:
------------
osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpnd/cpnd_sec.cc
Complete diffstat:
------------------
osaf/libs/common/cpsv/include/cpnd_cb.h | 6 +-
osaf/libs/common/cpsv/include/cpnd_init.h | 14 +-
osaf/libs/common/cpsv/include/cpsv_evt.h | 2 +-
osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpnd/Makefile.am | 3 +-
osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpnd/cpnd_db.c | 246 +----------------
osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpnd/cpnd_evt.c | 115 ++++---
osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpnd/cpnd_proc.c | 26 +-
osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpnd/cpnd_res.c | 15 +-
osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpnd/cpnd_sec.cc | 424 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
9 files changed, 531 insertions(+), 320 deletions(-)
Testing Commands:
-----------------
(1) Create a 6-node setup
(2) Open 5 checkpoints (40k sections for each checkpoint, each section 1k) for
writing, 1 on each active node
(3) On the standby node, open these 5 for reading
(4) Continuously write the active checkpoints as fast as possible.
Testing, Expected Results:
--------------------------
The standby opening all 5 checkpoints should be able to keep up with all the
writes (200k sections). No dropped packets, no timeouts.
Conditions of Submission:
-------------------------
Arch Built Started Linux distro
-------------------------------------------
mips n n
mips64 n n
x86 n n
x86_64 y y
powerpc n n
powerpc64 n n
Reviewer Checklist:
-------------------
[Submitters: make sure that your review doesn't trigger any checkmarks!]
Your checkin has not passed review because (see checked entries):
___ Your RR template is generally incomplete; it has too many blank entries
that need proper data filled in.
___ You have failed to nominate the proper persons for review and push.
___ Your patches do not have proper short+long header
___ You have grammar/spelling in your header that is unacceptable.
___ You have exceeded a sensible line length in your headers/comments/text.
___ You have failed to put in a proper Trac Ticket # into your commits.
___ You have incorrectly put/left internal data in your comments/files
(i.e. internal bug tracking tool IDs, product names etc)
___ You have not given any evidence of testing beyond basic build tests.
Demonstrate some level of runtime or other sanity testing.
___ You have ^M present in some of your files. These have to be removed.
___ You have needlessly changed whitespace or added whitespace crimes
like trailing spaces, or spaces before tabs.
___ You have mixed real technical changes with whitespace and other
cosmetic code cleanup changes. These have to be separate commits.
___ You need to refactor your submission into logical chunks; there is
too much content into a single commit.
___ You have extraneous garbage in your review (merge commits etc)
___ You have giant attachments which should never have been sent;
Instead you should place your content in a public tree to be pulled.
___ You have too many commits attached to an e-mail; resend as threaded
commits, or place in a public tree for a pull.
___ You have resent this content multiple times without a clear indication
of what has changed between each re-send.
___ You have failed to adequately and individually address all of the
comments and change requests that were proposed in the initial review.
___ You have a misconfigured ~/.hgrc file (i.e. username, email etc)
___ Your computer have a badly configured date and time; confusing the
the threaded patch review.
___ Your changes affect IPC mechanism, and you don't present any results
for in-service upgradability test.
___ Your changes affect user manual and documentation, your patch series
do not contain the patch that updates the Doxygen manual.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos.
Get unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available
Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
