----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/68490/#review208286 -----------------------------------------------------------
Thanks! Can you also include some commentary on the rest of the allocation benchmarks as well as the overhead within the Resources micro-benchmarks? include/mesos/resources.hpp Lines 590-591 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/68490/#comment292011> ``` // We use `boost::indirect_iterator` to expose `Resource_` iteration, // while actually storing `shared_ptr<Resource_>`. ``` include/mesos/resources.hpp Lines 592 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/68490/#comment292010> Remove the newline? include/mesos/resources.hpp Lines 588-590 (original), 597-599 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/68490/#comment292009> This comment now looks a little weird, how about: ``` // NOTE: Non-const `begin()` and `end()` intentionally return const // iterators to prevent mutable access to the `Resource` objects. ``` include/mesos/resources.hpp Lines 678-679 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/68490/#comment292012> What's this referring to? Reading this I see it already has an rvalue reference? include/mesos/resources.hpp Lines 682 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/68490/#comment292017> Why do we need this? It seems like the callers should just be de-referencing their shared_ptr prior to calling? include/mesos/resources.hpp Line 676 (original), 691-693 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/68490/#comment292013> A comment would be helpful for the reader: ``` // Resources are stored using copy-on-write: // // (1) Copies are done by copying the `shared_ptr`. This // makes read-only filtering (e.g. `unreserved()`) // inexpensive as we do not have to perform copies // of the resource objects. // // (2) When a write occurs: // (a) If there's a single reference to the resource // object, we mutate directly. // (b) If there's more than a single reference to the // resource object, we copy first, then mutate the // copy. ``` src/common/resources.cpp Line 1471 (original), 1473 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/68490/#comment292020> I'm a little puzzled about these `const shared_ptr<...>` foreach loops. Why don't the const ones do `const Resource_&` loops? ``` foreach (const Resource_& resource_, that) { ``` Something I'm missing? src/common/resources.cpp Line 1503 (original), 1505 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/68490/#comment292014> It seems ok to slip this in here, but generally please send unrelated cleanups as separate patches. :) src/common/resources.cpp Line 1514 (original), 1516-1518 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/68490/#comment292016> I'm not sure how obvious these will be to readers, maybe a comment on all of these? ``` // Copy-on-write (if more than 1 reference). if (resource_.use_count() > 1) { resource_ = make_shared<Resource_>(*resource_); } ``` Maybe something like (since we can't use `mutable`): ``` make_mutable(resource_); ``` Maybe also make it composable? ``` make_mutable(resource_)->resource.mutable_allocation_info()->set_role(role); ``` Still, seems rather error prone and easy to forget to check for copies prior to mutating? Wonder if there's a way to make it less brittle. src/common/resources.cpp Lines 1543-1544 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/68490/#comment292015> Interesting suggestion! src/common/resources.cpp Lines 1667-1670 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/68490/#comment292018> Seems odd, why don't we use `Resource` directly here? ``` Resource r = *resource_; r.clear_reservations(); result.add(std::move(r)); ``` (I left a comment above about removing the add that takes a shared_ptr, since it doesn't seem needed?) src/common/resources.cpp Line 1676 (original), 1692 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/68490/#comment292019> Feel free to pull some of these unrelated improvements out in front of this, it would help make the diff easier for reviewers. src/common/resources.cpp Lines 1924-1925 (original), 1940-1941 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/68490/#comment292021> Ditto here and elsewhere for the question above about const shared pointer loops vs `const Resource_&` loops src/common/resources.cpp Line 1954 (original), 1972-1979 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/68490/#comment292022> Why is this needed? Isn't the point of this change that toUnreserved avoids copying now? src/common/resources.cpp Lines 1958-1963 (original), 1983-1993 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/68490/#comment292023> Hm.. is there a way to simplify this? This seems to be just adding in the reserved resources? Could we call pushReservation or something instead of touching the resources field directly? Right now `find()` is not performance critical, so it doesn't need to be optimal if it's simpler not to be. - Benjamin Mahler On Aug. 23, 2018, 10:13 p.m., Meng Zhu wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/68490/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Aug. 23, 2018, 10:13 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos and Benjamin Mahler. > > > Bugs: MESOS-6765 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-6765 > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > This patch lets `class Resources` only store shared > pointers to the underlying resource objects, so that > read-only filter operations such as `reserved()`, > `unreserved()` and etc. can avoid making copies of > the whole resource objects. Instead, only shared pointers > are copied. > > In write operations, we check if there are more than one > references to the resource object. If so, a copy is made > for safe mutation without affecting owners. > > To maintain the usage abstraction that `class Resources` > still holds resource objects, we utilize > `boost::indirect_iterator` iterator adapter to deference > the shared pointers as we iterate. > > > Diffs > ----- > > include/mesos/resources.hpp 6f81b14f8bc090a144eeae8f15639c370366166d > include/mesos/v1/resources.hpp 09110530da16678abf6bf6b308906dd8ccc8180a > src/common/resources.cpp 0110c0ee3e810ad1c29dfa5507b13ebd5d0222a2 > src/v1/resources.cpp 228a7327ffe7934d37b56ee67b8be9ae1e119ca8 > > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/68490/diff/1/ > > > Testing > ------- > > make check > > Did a quick test on Mac with an optimized build, running benchmark > `HierarchicalAllocator_BENCHMARK_Test.ResourceLabels`, here are the results > of comparing "before" and "after". Note, DVFS is not fixed. And we only did a > partial run to verify the validity of the patch, full evaluation coming soon. > > **Overall, 33% performance improvement for the 1st steup (1000 agents and 1 > frameworks) and 32% improvement for the first 50 iterarions of the 2nd setup > (1000 agents and 50 frameworks).** > > Before: > > [ RUN ] > SlaveAndFrameworkCount/HierarchicalAllocator_BENCHMARK_Test.ResourceLabels/0 > > Using 1000 agents and 1 frameworks > Added 1 frameworks in 1.220022ms > Added 1000 agents in 465.045382ms > round 0 allocate() took 54.803773ms to make 0 offers after filtering 1000 > offers > round 1 allocate() took 66.690456ms to make 0 offers after filtering 1000 > offers > > Using 1000 agents and 50 frameworks > Added 50 frameworks in 1.40774ms > Added 1000 agents in 460.562488ms > round 0 allocate() took 155.500548ms to make 1000 offers after filtering 1000 > offers > round 1 allocate() took 155.194986ms to make 1000 offers after filtering 2000 > offers > round 2 allocate() took 160.706712ms to make 1000 offers after filtering 3000 > offers > round 3 allocate() took 156.701883ms to make 1000 offers after filtering 4000 > offers > round 4 allocate() took 164.246987ms to make 1000 offers after filtering 5000 > offers > round 5 allocate() took 160.791809ms to make 1000 offers after filtering 6000 > offers > round 6 allocate() took 166.064652ms to make 1000 offers after filtering 7000 > offers > round 7 allocate() took 162.177213ms to make 1000 offers after filtering 8000 > offers > round 8 allocate() took 166.620163ms to make 1000 offers after filtering 9000 > offers > round 9 allocate() took 167.970045ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 10000 offers > round 10 allocate() took 166.189463ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 11000 offers > round 11 allocate() took 170.863462ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 12000 offers > round 12 allocate() took 172.260473ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 13000 offers > round 13 allocate() took 170.553911ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 14000 offers > round 14 allocate() took 235.764593ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 15000 offers > round 15 allocate() took 247.250433ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 16000 offers > round 16 allocate() took 276.932824ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 17000 offers > round 17 allocate() took 248.888469ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 18000 offers > round 18 allocate() took 193.890556ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 19000 offers > round 19 allocate() took 195.105346ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 20000 offers > round 20 allocate() took 194.447428ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 21000 offers > round 21 allocate() took 205.486287ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 22000 offers > round 22 allocate() took 199.241922ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 23000 offers > round 23 allocate() took 200.885488ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 24000 offers > round 24 allocate() took 216.132361ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 25000 offers > round 25 allocate() took 210.638273ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 26000 offers > round 26 allocate() took 232.397778ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 27000 offers > round 27 allocate() took 239.633708ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 28000 offers > round 28 allocate() took 225.829677ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 29000 offers > round 29 allocate() took 245.143272ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 30000 offers > round 30 allocate() took 248.630295ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 31000 offers > round 31 allocate() took 262.147804ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 32000 offers > round 32 allocate() took 251.109969ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 33000 offers > round 33 allocate() took 263.92273ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 34000 offers > round 34 allocate() took 268.422275ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 35000 offers > round 35 allocate() took 273.830163ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 36000 offers > round 36 allocate() took 283.25481ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 37000 offers > round 37 allocate() took 366.400781ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 38000 offers > round 38 allocate() took 382.202755ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 39000 offers > round 39 allocate() took 337.266121ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 40000 offers > round 40 allocate() took 381.033696ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 41000 offers > round 41 allocate() took 365.941946ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 42000 offers > round 42 allocate() took 379.527886ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 43000 offers > round 43 allocate() took 425.661181ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 44000 offers > round 44 allocate() took 455.86657ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 45000 offers > round 45 allocate() took 506.943117ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 46000 offers > round 46 allocate() took 681.880233ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 47000 offers > round 47 allocate() took 860.932974ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 48000 offers > round 48 allocate() took 960.272209ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 49000 offers > round 49 allocate() took 1.907427057secs to make 0 offers after filtering > 50000 offers > round 50 allocate() took 2.157864654secs to make 0 offers after filtering > 50000 offers > > > After: > > Using 1000 agents and 1 frameworks > Added 1 frameworks in 404709ns > Added 1000 agents in 245.162138ms > round 0 allocate() took 38.498883ms to make 0 offers after filtering 1000 > offers > round 1 allocate() took 42.234898ms to make 0 offers after filtering 1000 > offers > > Using 1000 agents and 50 frameworks > Added 50 frameworks in 1.441281ms > Added 1000 agents in 261.923711ms > round 0 allocate() took 121.706074ms to make 1000 offers after filtering 1000 > offers > round 1 allocate() took 150.465925ms to make 1000 offers after filtering 2000 > offers > round 2 allocate() took 273.549893ms to make 1000 offers after filtering 3000 > offers > round 3 allocate() took 199.248799ms to make 1000 offers after filtering 4000 > offers > round 4 allocate() took 133.865752ms to make 1000 offers after filtering 5000 > offers > round 5 allocate() took 130.828599ms to make 1000 offers after filtering 6000 > offers > round 6 allocate() took 134.385597ms to make 1000 offers after filtering 7000 > offers > round 7 allocate() took 135.810198ms to make 1000 offers after filtering 8000 > offers > round 8 allocate() took 126.128592ms to make 1000 offers after filtering 9000 > offers > round 9 allocate() took 144.794829ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 10000 offers > round 10 allocate() took 162.533506ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 11000 offers > round 11 allocate() took 159.22141ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 12000 offers > round 12 allocate() took 174.739823ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 13000 offers > round 13 allocate() took 171.095423ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 14000 offers > round 14 allocate() took 186.876661ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 15000 offers > round 15 allocate() took 177.021603ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 16000 offers > round 16 allocate() took 165.970722ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 17000 offers > round 17 allocate() took 162.016338ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 18000 offers > round 18 allocate() took 138.698917ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 19000 offers > round 19 allocate() took 144.556913ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 20000 offers > round 20 allocate() took 155.689926ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 21000 offers > round 21 allocate() took 149.952025ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 22000 offers > round 22 allocate() took 135.98823ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 23000 offers > round 23 allocate() took 132.520992ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 24000 offers > round 24 allocate() took 143.325635ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 25000 offers > round 25 allocate() took 153.313423ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 26000 offers > round 26 allocate() took 169.889066ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 27000 offers > round 27 allocate() took 188.969694ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 28000 offers > round 28 allocate() took 176.132259ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 29000 offers > round 29 allocate() took 186.754676ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 30000 offers > round 30 allocate() took 166.346508ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 31000 offers > round 31 allocate() took 172.557665ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 32000 offers > round 32 allocate() took 169.874406ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 33000 offers > round 33 allocate() took 190.470692ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 34000 offers > round 34 allocate() took 184.328221ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 35000 offers > round 35 allocate() took 222.081892ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 36000 offers > round 36 allocate() took 203.134216ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 37000 offers > round 37 allocate() took 217.490016ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 38000 offers > round 38 allocate() took 257.449904ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 39000 offers > round 39 allocate() took 252.468529ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 40000 offers > round 40 allocate() took 229.433398ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 41000 offers > round 41 allocate() took 251.920859ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 42000 offers > round 42 allocate() took 273.529747ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 43000 offers > round 43 allocate() took 315.08445ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 44000 offers > round 44 allocate() took 354.758003ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 45000 offers > round 45 allocate() took 350.378463ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 46000 offers > round 46 allocate() took 415.070355ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 47000 offers > round 47 allocate() took 519.922944ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 48000 offers > round 48 allocate() took 710.598546ms to make 1000 offers after filtering > 49000 offers > round 49 allocate() took 1.267395251secs to make 0 offers after filtering > 50000 offers > round 50 allocate() took 1.210188235secs to make 0 offers after filtering > 50000 offers > > > Thanks, > > Meng Zhu > >
