Just as a clarification, there is no default timeout in the Java client.
Riak 1.4 introduced server-side timeouts on operations and the default is
60 seconds (60k milliseconds). By default, the client does retry after
receiving the timeout error message which is the behavior you're seeing.

- Roach
On Mar 12, 2014 7:42 AM, "Matthew MacClary" <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Thanks for the suggestion Christian. Right now I am running an experiment
> with pb_backlog set to 64 up from the default of 5. The way our application
> uses the client there would usually be 4 connections initiated at the same
> time, but there could be as many as 12 connections initiated at the same
> time right now. I wonder if that is causing the client to time out and try
> back in 60 seconds!
>
> I will report my results.
>
> Best regards,
>
> -Matt
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 11:38 PM, Christian Dahlqvist <[email protected]
> > wrote:
>
>> Hi Matthew,
>>
>> I believe 60 seconds is the default timeout in the client, so it is
>> possible the `busy_dist_port` issues have caused a timeout and that the
>> automatic retry then has succeeded.
>>
>> A small +zdbbl value will cause the internal buffers to fill up and
>> result in `busy_dist_port` messages, which will cause performance problems.
>> I would recommend setting +zdbbl to 16384 (16MB) or 32768 (32MB) and verify
>> that you stop seeing busy_dist_post messages in the logs. If problems
>> persist it may be required to set it even higher.
>>
>> It is also important to note that `busy_dist_port` messages can be caused
>> by individual large objects even if +zdbbl is set to a reasonably large
>> value as outlined above. In Riak 1.4.8, logging of large objects has been
>> introduced, which will allow you to identify large objects that could cause
>> problems by going through the logs. You can also track large objects by
>> trending the `node_get_fsm_objsize_100` statistic.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Christian
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 5:43 AM, Matthew MacClary <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi everyone, we are running Riak 1.4.1 on RHEL 6.2 using bitcask. We are
>>> using protobufs with the Java client, and our binary objects are typically
>>> a few hundred KB in size. I have noticed a persistent anomaly with riak
>>> reads and writes. It seems like often, maybe 0.5% of the time, writing to
>>> Riak takes 60 seconds longer than it should. Here is a prime example I just
>>> trimmed from a log file (see the last time entry below).
>>>
>>> This is not bitcask merge related because it happens before any of the
>>> bitcask slabs are large enough to merge. I am seeing lots of busy_dist_port
>>> messages in the Riak logs. One unique setting is that we have a small zdbbl
>>> setting of 128K because this seemed to prevent congestive collapse of
>>> throughput at high sustained loads. I believe that this 60 second timeout
>>> persisted across the various zdbbl settings we tried. Also we see this
>>> occasional 60 second delay on both VMs and real server hardware.
>>>
>>> Does anyone know where this 60 second delay comes from?
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>> -Matt
>>>
>>>
>>> 2014-03-11 20:40:00,747 INFO  [Thread-61] sally.ReportHandler - Riak
>>> load time for 88: 0.087 seconds
>>> 2014-03-11 20:40:01,137 INFO  [Thread-62] sally.ReportHandler - Riak
>>> load time for 70: 0.185 seconds
>>> 2014-03-11 20:40:01,958 INFO  [Thread-63] sally.ReportHandler - Riak
>>> load time for 97: 0.054 seconds
>>> 2014-03-11 20:40:02,566 INFO  [Thread-64] sally.ReportHandler - Riak
>>> load time for 90: 0.043 seconds
>>> 2014-03-11 20:40:02,830 INFO  [Thread-65] sally.ReportHandler - Riak
>>> load time for 85: 0.051 seconds
>>> 2014-03-11 20:40:04,162 INFO  [Thread-66] sally.ReportHandler - Riak
>>> load time for 101: 0.075 seconds
>>> 2014-03-11 20:40:04,503 INFO  [Thread-67] sally.ReportHandler - Riak
>>> load time for 103: 0.048 seconds
>>> 2014-03-11 20:40:05,745 INFO  [Thread-68] sally.ReportHandler - Riak
>>> load time for 98: 0.031 seconds
>>> 2014-03-11 20:40:06,041 INFO  [Thread-69] sally.ReportHandler - Riak
>>> load time for 102: 0.063 seconds
>>> 2014-03-11 20:40:06,444 INFO  [Thread-70] sally.ReportHandler - Riak
>>> load time for 92: 0.022 seconds
>>> 2014-03-11 20:40:06,903 INFO  [Thread-71] sally.ReportHandler - Riak
>>> load time for 99: 0.039 seconds
>>> 2014-03-11 20:40:09,847 INFO  [Thread-72] sally.ReportHandler - Riak
>>> load time for 106: 0.019 seconds
>>> 2014-03-11 20:40:10,107 INFO  [Thread-73] sally.ReportHandler - Riak
>>> load time for 108: 0.043 seconds
>>> 2014-03-11 20:40:47,820 INFO  [Thread-52] sally.ReportHandler - Riak
>>> load time for 62: 1 minutes, 0.190 seconds
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> riak-users mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> riak-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com
>
>
_______________________________________________
riak-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com

Reply via email to