+1 from me too.

Sammi 

On 2020/2/8, 6:00 AM, "Anu Engineer" <[email protected]> wrote:

    +1 from me too
    
    —Anu
    
    > On Feb 7, 2020, at 1:47 PM, Siddharth Wagle <[email protected]> 
wrote:
    > 
    > Agree with Xiaoyu, +1 for the merge.
    > 
    > Thanks, Li Cheng for working on this feature and taking it to completion.
    > 
    > Best,
    > Sid
    > 
    >> On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 1:38 PM Xiaoyu Yao <[email protected]> 
wrote:
    >> 
    >> Thanks for sharing the data. Given the issues raised earlier have been
    >> addressed in the follow up JIRA. I'm +1 for merge.
    >> 
    >> Xiaoyu
    >> 
    >> On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 8:34 AM timmycheng(程力) <[email protected]>
    >> wrote:
    >> 
    >>> Hey all,
    >>> 
    >>> Just wanna follow up on multi-raft feature progress.  I’ve collect some
    >>> feedbacks from Xiaoyu, Anu and Sid (
    >>> 
    >> 
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NxCiHhn0u9BqgjuUXB8zxGtny69Qek4yTFe1QqUHiqM/edit
    >> )
    >>> and address them all in HDDS-2913. Shout out to Xiaoyu, Anu and Sid for
    >> the
    >>> feedbacks and help on resolving them as well. Also would like to know if
    >>> there are other comments and reviews.
    >>> 
    >>> We at Tencent has already deployed the multi-raft version to our 
internal
    >>> production cluster and it’s serving reasonable amount of traffic now. So
    >>> far there are over 16K times of write into our Ozone cluster and I
    >> compare
    >>> with the single-raft version’s performance. Both are measured in similar
    >>> pattern of traffic on daily basis.
    >>> 
    >>> Write finishes in:
    >>> 
    >>> Single raft
    >>> 
    >>> Multi raft
    >>> 
    >>>> 3s
    >>> 
    >>> 0.009%
    >>> 
    >>> 0.006%
    >>> 
    >>> 2s ~ 3s
    >>> 
    >>> 27.4%
    >>> 
    >>> 1.46%
    >>> 
    >>> 1s ~ 2s
    >>> 
    >>> 1.64%
    >>> 
    >>> 0.07%
    >>> 
    >>> 0.2s ~ 1s
    >>> 
    >>> 2.7%
    >>> 
    >>> 0.53%
    >>> 
    >>> < 0.2s
    >>> 
    >>> 68.2%
    >>> 
    >>> 97.9%
    >>> 
    >>> 
    >>> Our internal customer writes to ozone every day and there are schedules
    >>> jobs as well as on-demand jobs. Size could be from KB to GB every write,
    >>> but every daes y’s traffic share the same pattern. Therefore, we see 
that
    >>> multi-raft version makes ~98% of write finish within 0.2s, which is 20%
    >>> more than what single-raft version can do. At the same time, those who
    >>> finishes from 2s to 3s reduces from 27.4% to 1.46%. Multi-raft has made
    >> our
    >>> internal cluster more stable and the latency fluctuates way less, which
    >> is
    >>> pretty helpful.
    >>> 
    >>> Cheers,
    >>> Li
    >>> 
    >>> 发件人: "timmycheng(程力)" <[email protected]>
    >>> 日期: 2020年1月13日 星期一 下午4:24
    >>> 收件人: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
    >>> 主题: [DISCUSS] - Merge Multi-Raft Support - HDDS-1564
    >>> 
    >>> Hey all,
    >>> 
    >>> Happy to present the multi-raft feature to ozone community (
    >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDDS-1564). This feature is to
    >>> allow every datanode to host more than 1 pipeline based on user config 
to
    >>> better utilize every datanode’s disks IO.
    >>> 
    >>> All dev work have been done and I’ve conducted performance tests in
    >>> different scenarios. Based on my testing, multi-raft ozone cluster can
    >> help
    >>> to make writing latency as low as 1/3 of single-raft’s one. Please check
    >>> the attachment in the above JIRA for test brief and more details as well
    >> as
    >>> the code patch.
    >>> 
    >>> I would like to use this thread to discuss about this feature and it’s
    >>> merge back to master.
    >>> 
    >>> -Li
    >>> 
    >> 
    
    

Reply via email to