[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-7546?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14069065#comment-14069065
 ] 

Benedict commented on CASSANDRA-7546:
-------------------------------------

I'll take a look at your patch shortly, but in the meantime it's worth pointing 
out cassandra-stress does now support fairly complex CQL inserts including 
various sizes of batch updates, with fine grained control over how large a 
partition to generate, and what percentage of that total partition to update at 
any point. Take a look at the sample stress profiles under the tools hierarchy 
on latest 2.1

> AtomicSortedColumns.addAllWithSizeDelta has a spin loop that allocates memory
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CASSANDRA-7546
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-7546
>             Project: Cassandra
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: Core
>            Reporter: graham sanderson
>            Assignee: graham sanderson
>         Attachments: 7546.20.txt, 7546.20_2.txt, 7546.20_alt.txt, 
> suggestion1.txt, suggestion1_21.txt
>
>
> In order to preserve atomicity, this code attempts to read, clone/update, 
> then CAS the state of the partition.
> Under heavy contention for updating a single partition this can cause some 
> fairly staggering memory growth (the more cores on your machine the worst it 
> gets).
> Whilst many usage patterns don't do highly concurrent updates to the same 
> partition, hinting today, does, and in this case wild (order(s) of magnitude 
> more than expected) memory allocation rates can be seen (especially when the 
> updates being hinted are small updates to different partitions which can 
> happen very fast on their own) - see CASSANDRA-7545
> It would be best to eliminate/reduce/limit the spinning memory allocation 
> whilst not slowing down the very common un-contended case.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)

Reply via email to