> On March 19, 2018, 11:30 p.m., Kai Huang wrote:
> > src/main/python/apache/thermos/monitoring/disk.py
> > Lines 96 (patched)
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/66103/diff/1/?file=1982415#file1982415line96>
> >
> >     Just curious: is there any reason we set this value to -1GB?

It is just a magic number. Although it seems like the observer shows negative 
numbers as `-0.0GB` so I guess I can only set that to `-1`. The reason to show 
a negative number is to show the user that there is something worong with the 
setup.


- Reza


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/66103/#review199486
-----------------------------------------------------------


On March 20, 2018, 5:37 a.m., Reza Motamedi wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/66103/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated March 20, 2018, 5:37 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Aurora, David McLaughlin, Daniel Knightly, Jordan Ly, 
> Santhosh Kumar Shanmugham, and Stephan Erb.
> 
> 
> Repository: aurora
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> When disk isolation is enabled in a Mesos agent it calculates the disk usage 
> for each container. 
> Thermos Observer also monitors disk usage using `twitter.common.dirutil`, 
> essentially repeating the work already done by the agent. In practice, we see 
> that disk monitoring is one of the most expensive resource monitoring tasks. 
> For instance, when there are deeply nested directories, the CPU utilization 
> of the observer process can easily reach 1.5 CPUs. It would be ideal if we 
> delegate the disk monitoring task to the agent and do it only once. With this 
> approach, when disk collection has improved in the agent (for instance by 
> implementing XFS isolation), we can simply benefit from it without any code 
> change. Some more information about the problem is provided in AURORA-1918.
> 
> This patch that introduces `MesosDiskCollector` which queries the agent's API 
> endpoint to lookup disk_used_bytes. Note that there is also resource 
> monitoring in thermos executor. Currently, I left the disk collector there to 
> use the `du` implementation. That can be changed in a later patch.
> 
> I modified some vagrant config files including `aurora-executor.service` and 
> `etc_mesos-slave/isolation` for testing. They can be left as is. I included 
> them in this patch to show how this would work e2e.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   3rdparty/python/requirements.txt 4ac242cfa2c1c19cb7447816ab86e748839d3d11 
>   examples/jobs/hello_world.aurora 5401bfebe753b5e53abd08baeac501144ced9b5a 
>   examples/vagrant/mesos_config/etc_mesos-slave/isolation 
> 1a7028ffc70116b104ef3ad22b7388f637707a0f 
>   examples/vagrant/systemd/aurora-executor.service 
> 5a1a9082ecd7b1367ec677d760a5c375b6db9076 
>   src/main/python/apache/aurora/tools/thermos_observer.py 
> dd9f0c46ceac9e939b1b763073314161de0ea614 
>   src/main/python/apache/thermos/monitoring/BUILD 
> 65ba7088f65e7baa5d30744736ba456b46a55e86 
>   src/main/python/apache/thermos/monitoring/disk.py 
> 52c5d74fd70b5942ea3ef5101ba3f27bfc98fc21 
>   src/main/python/apache/thermos/monitoring/resource.py 
> f5e3849ca6682c6d4720698be869ca6b9f703b94 
>   src/main/python/apache/thermos/observer/task_observer.py 
> 4bb5d239e81fe4659397f899760c0e8853e93786 
>   
> src/test/python/apache/aurora/executor/common/test_resource_manager_integration.py
>  fe74bd1d36666ecd89fca1b5b2251202cbbc0f24 
>   src/test/python/apache/thermos/monitoring/BUILD 
> 8f2b39336dce6c7b580e6ba0009f60afdcb89179 
>   src/test/python/apache/thermos/monitoring/test_disk.py 
> 362393bfd1facf3198e2d438d0596b16700b72b8 
>   src/test/python/apache/thermos/monitoring/test_resource.py 
> e577e552d4ee1807096a15401851bb9fd95fa426 
> 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/66103/diff/2/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> I added unit tests.
> Tested in vagrant and it works as intenced.
> I also built and deployed in our test enviroment. In order to measure 
> imporoved performance I created jobs with nested folders and noticed 
> reduction in CPU utilization of the Observer process, by at least 60%. (1.5 
> CPU cores to 0.4 CPU cores)
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Reza Motamedi
> 
>

Reply via email to