----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/56575/#review165388 -----------------------------------------------------------
src/main/java/org/apache/aurora/scheduler/pruning/TaskHistoryPruner.java (line 172) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/56575/#comment237221> If the goal is to reduce GC pressure, then what we want is to put an upper bound on object allocation. To do that, I'd be +1 to your earlier proposal to have an argument that limits the total number of tasks (across all jobs) that can be pruned. The other way to (possibly) reduce GC pressure is to do most of the filtering in H2 and only fetch task ids rather than fully hydrated task objects. Since H2 is on-heap, it might end up generating a lot of gargbage anyway.. but it would be hard to imagine that being more than the saving through the MyBatis -> Immutable Thrift translation. - David McLaughlin On Feb. 13, 2017, 5:30 p.m., Mehrdad Nurolahzade wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/56575/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Feb. 13, 2017, 5:30 p.m.) > > > Review request for Aurora, David McLaughlin, Santhosh Kumar Shanmugham, and > Stephan Erb. > > > Bugs: AURORA-1837 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1837 > > > Repository: aurora > > > Description > ------- > > This patch addressed efficiency issues in the current implementation of > `TaskHistoryPruner`. The new design is similar to that of > `JobUpdateHistoryPruner`: (a) Instead of registering a `DelayExecutor` run > upon terminal task state transitions, it runs on preconfigured intervals, > finds all terminal state tasks that meet pruning criteria and deletes them. > (b) Makes the initial task history pruning delay configurable so that it does > not hamper scheduler upon start. > > The new design addressed the following two efficiecy problems: > > 1. Upon scheduler restart/failure, the in-memory state of task history > pruning scheduled with `DelayExecutor` is lost. `TaskHistoryPruner` learns > about these dead tasks upon restart when log is replayed. These expired tasks > are picked up by the second call to `executor.execute()` that performs job > level pruning immediately (i.e., without delay). Hence, most task history > pruning happens after scheduler restarts and can severely hamper scheduler > performance (or cause consecutive fail-overs on test clusters when we put > load test on scheduler). > > 2. Expired tasks can be picked up for pruning multiple times. The > asynchronous nature of `BatchWorker` which used to process task deletions > introduces some delay between delete enqueue and delete execution. As a > result, tasks already queued for deletion in a previous evaluation round > might get picked up, evaluated and enqueued for deletion again. This is > evident in `tasks_pruned` metric which reflects numbers much higher than the > actual number of expired tasks deleted. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/main/java/org/apache/aurora/scheduler/pruning/PruningModule.java > 735199ac1ccccab343c24471890aa330d6635c26 > src/main/java/org/apache/aurora/scheduler/pruning/TaskHistoryPruner.java > f77849498ff23616f1d56d133eb218f837ac3413 > > src/test/java/org/apache/aurora/scheduler/pruning/TaskHistoryPrunerTest.java > 14e4040e0b94e96f77068b41454311fa3bf53573 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/56575/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > Manual testing under Vagrant > > > Thanks, > > Mehrdad Nurolahzade > >
