[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-9693?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17791354#comment-17791354 ]
Haruki Okada commented on KAFKA-9693: ------------------------------------- [~paolomoriello] [~novosibman] Hi, I believe the latency spike due to flushing on log.roll is now resolved by https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-15046 > Kafka latency spikes caused by log segment flush on roll > -------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: KAFKA-9693 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-9693 > Project: Kafka > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: core > Environment: OS: Amazon Linux 2 > Kafka version: 2.2.1 > Reporter: Paolo Moriello > Assignee: Paolo Moriello > Priority: Major > Labels: Performance, latency, performance > Fix For: 3.7.0 > > Attachments: image-2020-03-10-13-17-34-618.png, > image-2020-03-10-14-36-21-807.png, image-2020-03-10-15-00-23-020.png, > image-2020-03-10-15-00-54-204.png, image-2020-06-23-12-24-46-548.png, > image-2020-06-23-12-24-58-788.png, image-2020-06-26-13-43-21-723.png, > image-2020-06-26-13-46-52-861.png, image-2020-06-26-14-06-01-505.png, > latency_plot2.png > > > h1. Summary > When a log segment fills up, Kafka rolls over onto a new active segment and > force the flush of the old segment to disk. When this happens, log segment > _append_ duration increase causing important latency spikes on producer(s) > and replica(s). This ticket aims to highlight the problem and propose a > simple mitigation: add a new configuration to enable/disable rolled segment > flush. > h1. 1. Phenomenon > Response time of produce request (99th ~ 99.9th %ile) repeatedly spikes to > ~50x-200x more than usual. For instance, normally 99th %ile is lower than > 5ms, but when this issue occurs, it marks 100ms to 200ms. 99.9th and 99.99th > %iles even jump to 500-700ms. > Latency spikes happen at constant frequency (depending on the input > throughput), for small amounts of time. All the producers experience a > latency increase at the same time. > h1. !image-2020-03-10-13-17-34-618.png|width=942,height=314! > {{Example of response time plot observed during on a single producer.}} > URPs rarely appear in correspondence of the latency spikes too. This is > harder to reproduce, but from time to time it is possible to see a few > partitions going out of sync in correspondence of a spike. > h1. 2. Experiment > h2. 2.1 Setup > Kafka cluster hosted on AWS EC2 instances. > h4. Cluster > * 15 Kafka brokers: (EC2 m5.4xlarge) > ** Disk: 1100Gb EBS volumes (4750Mbps) > ** Network: 10 Gbps > ** CPU: 16 Intel Xeon Platinum 8000 > ** Memory: 64Gb > * 3 Zookeeper nodes: m5.large > * 6 producers on 6 EC2 instances in the same region > * 1 topic, 90 partitions - replication factor=3 > h4. Broker config > Relevant configurations: > {quote}num.io.threads=8 > num.replica.fetchers=2 > offsets.topic.replication.factor=3 > num.network.threads=5 > num.recovery.threads.per.data.dir=2 > min.insync.replicas=2 > num.partitions=1 > {quote} > h4. Perf Test > * Throughput ~6000-8000 (~40-70Mb/s input + replication = ~120-210Mb/s per > broker) > * record size = 20000 > * Acks = 1, linger.ms = 1, compression.type = none > * Test duration: ~20/30min > h2. 2.2 Analysis > Our analysis showed an high +correlation between log segment flush count/rate > and the latency spikes+. This indicates that the spikes in max latency are > related to Kafka behavior on rolling over new segments. > The other metrics did not show any relevant impact on any hardware component > of the cluster, eg. cpu, memory, network traffic, disk throughput... > > !latency_plot2.png|width=924,height=308! > {{Correlation between latency spikes and log segment flush count. p50, p95, > p99, p999 and p9999 latencies (left axis, ns) and the flush #count (right > axis, stepping blue line in plot).}} > Kafka schedules logs flushing (this includes flushing the file record > containing log entries, the offset index, the timestamp index and the > transaction index) during _roll_ operations. A log is rolled over onto a new > empty log when: > * the log segment is full > * the maxtime has elapsed since the timestamp of first message in the > segment (or, in absence of it, since the create time) > * the index is full > In this case, the increase in latency happens on _append_ of a new message > set to the active segment of the log. This is a synchronous operation which > therefore blocks producers requests, causing the latency increase. > To confirm this, I instrumented Kafka to measure the duration of > FileRecords.append(MemoryRecords) method, which is responsible of writing > memory records to file. As a result, I observed the same spiky pattern as in > the producer latency, with a one-to-one correspondence with the append > duration. > !image-2020-03-10-14-36-21-807.png|width=780,height=415! > {{FileRecords.append(MemoryRecords) duration during test run.}} > Therefore, every time a new log segment (log.segment.bytes is set to default > value of 1Gb) is rolled, Kafka forces a flush of the completed segment, which > appears to slowdown the subsequent append requests on the active segment. > h2. 2.3 Solution > I managed to completely mitigate the problem by disabling the flush happening > on log segment roll. Latency spikes and append duration flattened down. > !image-2020-03-10-15-00-23-020.png|width=906,height=302! > !image-2020-03-10-15-00-54-204.png|width=903,height=301! > {{Producer response time before and after disabling log flush.}} > > Generally, it is possible to control Kafka's flush behavior by setting a > bunch of log.flush.xxx configurations. This flush policy can be controlled to > force data to disk after a period of time or after a certain number of > messages has been written. > > However, these configuration don't have any impact on the flush of "rolled > segments", which is scheduled and executed anyway. > > Therefore, the suggested solution is to add a new configuration to > potentially control (enable/disable) this flush invocation. > Note: what are the implications of disabling the log segment flush? Forcing > the flush of old segments provides higher durability guarantees. In case of > system crash, in fact, we would potentially lose only messages in the active > segment log. By disabling this operation, instead, we'd increase the risk of > losing more data. > -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.10#820010)