[jira] Updated: (LUCENE-2537) FSDirectory.copy() impl is unsafe
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2537?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Shai Erera updated LUCENE-2537:
---
Attachment: LUCENE-2537.patch
Patch adds the following:
* FSIndexOutput overrides copyBytes to do optimized copies as well (when
possible).
* CompoundFileWriter changed to call copyBytes, instead of using an
intermediate buffer.
* Some minor typos and code corrections.
*NOTE:* with the changes to CFW, CheckAbort is accessed only after an entire
file is written. The estimated amount of work is the length copied. This means
that if abort() is called, it might take a tad longer until CFW will detect it.
I don't think it's serious, since (1) abort() is not called often, (2) for
small segments this will probably have no effect (OneMerge was accessed roughly
every ~2MB copied) and (3) as reported, the optimized copy is faster when using
FileChannel, therefore the time that passes between checks may not be that long.
And there's a (4) -- for really large segments, the amount of work done to
merge them is far larger than copying them into the CFS. Therefore the chances
that abort() will be called during that process is relatively small ...
All tests pass.
> FSDirectory.copy() impl is unsafe
> -
>
> Key: LUCENE-2537
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2537
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Store
>Reporter: Shai Erera
>Assignee: Shai Erera
> Fix For: 3.1, 4.0
>
> Attachments: FileCopyTest.java, LUCENE-2537.patch, LUCENE-2537.patch
>
>
> There are a couple of issues with it:
> # FileChannel.transferFrom documents that it may not copy the number of bytes
> requested, however we don't check the return value. So need to fix the code
> to read in a loop until all bytes were copied..
> # When calling addIndexes() w/ very large segments (few hundred MBs in size),
> I ran into the following exception (Java 1.6 -- Java 1.5's exception was
> cryptic):
> {code}
> Exception in thread "main" java.io.IOException: Map failed
> at sun.nio.ch.FileChannelImpl.map(FileChannelImpl.java:770)
> at
> sun.nio.ch.FileChannelImpl.transferToTrustedChannel(FileChannelImpl.java:450)
> at sun.nio.ch.FileChannelImpl.transferTo(FileChannelImpl.java:523)
> at org.apache.lucene.store.FSDirectory.copy(FSDirectory.java:450)
> at org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.addIndexes(IndexWriter.java:3019)
> Caused by: java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: Map failed
> at sun.nio.ch.FileChannelImpl.map0(Native Method)
> at sun.nio.ch.FileChannelImpl.map(FileChannelImpl.java:767)
> ... 7 more
> {code}
> I changed the impl to something like this:
> {code}
> long numWritten = 0;
> long numToWrite = input.size();
> long bufSize = 1 << 26;
> while (numWritten < numToWrite) {
> numWritten += output.transferFrom(input, numWritten, bufSize);
> }
> {code}
> And the code successfully adds the indexes. This code uses chunks of 64MB,
> however that might be too large for some applications, so we definitely need
> a smaller one. The question is how small so that performance won't be
> affected, and it'd be great if we can let it be configurable, however since
> that API is called by other API, such as addIndexes, not sure it's easily
> controllable.
> Also, I read somewhere (can't remember now where) that on Linux the native
> impl is better and does copy in chunks. So perhaps we should make a Linux
> specific impl?
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
[jira] Updated: (LUCENE-2537) FSDirectory.copy() impl is unsafe
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2537?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Shai Erera updated LUCENE-2537:
---
Attachment: LUCENE-2537.patch
Patch copies the files in chunks of 2MB. All core tests pass. I'll wait a day
or two in case someone wants to suggests a different approach, or chunk size
limit before I commit.
> FSDirectory.copy() impl is unsafe
> -
>
> Key: LUCENE-2537
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2537
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Store
>Reporter: Shai Erera
>Assignee: Shai Erera
> Fix For: 3.1, 4.0
>
> Attachments: FileCopyTest.java, LUCENE-2537.patch
>
>
> There are a couple of issues with it:
> # FileChannel.transferFrom documents that it may not copy the number of bytes
> requested, however we don't check the return value. So need to fix the code
> to read in a loop until all bytes were copied..
> # When calling addIndexes() w/ very large segments (few hundred MBs in size),
> I ran into the following exception (Java 1.6 -- Java 1.5's exception was
> cryptic):
> {code}
> Exception in thread "main" java.io.IOException: Map failed
> at sun.nio.ch.FileChannelImpl.map(FileChannelImpl.java:770)
> at
> sun.nio.ch.FileChannelImpl.transferToTrustedChannel(FileChannelImpl.java:450)
> at sun.nio.ch.FileChannelImpl.transferTo(FileChannelImpl.java:523)
> at org.apache.lucene.store.FSDirectory.copy(FSDirectory.java:450)
> at org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.addIndexes(IndexWriter.java:3019)
> Caused by: java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: Map failed
> at sun.nio.ch.FileChannelImpl.map0(Native Method)
> at sun.nio.ch.FileChannelImpl.map(FileChannelImpl.java:767)
> ... 7 more
> {code}
> I changed the impl to something like this:
> {code}
> long numWritten = 0;
> long numToWrite = input.size();
> long bufSize = 1 << 26;
> while (numWritten < numToWrite) {
> numWritten += output.transferFrom(input, numWritten, bufSize);
> }
> {code}
> And the code successfully adds the indexes. This code uses chunks of 64MB,
> however that might be too large for some applications, so we definitely need
> a smaller one. The question is how small so that performance won't be
> affected, and it'd be great if we can let it be configurable, however since
> that API is called by other API, such as addIndexes, not sure it's easily
> controllable.
> Also, I read somewhere (can't remember now where) that on Linux the native
> impl is better and does copy in chunks. So perhaps we should make a Linux
> specific impl?
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
[jira] Updated: (LUCENE-2537) FSDirectory.copy() impl is unsafe
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2537?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Shai Erera updated LUCENE-2537:
---
Attachment: FileCopyTest.java
I wrote a test which compares FileChannel API to intermediate buffer copies.
The test runs each method 3 times and reports the best time of each. It can be
run w/ different file and chunk sizes.
Here are the results of copying a 1GB file using different chunk sizes (the
chunk is used as the intermediate buffer size as well).
Machine spec:
* Linux, 64-bit (IBM) JVM
* 2xQuad (+hyper-threading) - 16 cores overall
* 16GB RAM
* SAS HD
||Chunk Size||FileChannel||Intermediate Buffer||Diff||
|64K|1865|1528|{color:red}-18%{color}|
|128K|1660|1526|{color:red}-9%{color}|
|512K|1514|1493|{color:red}-2%{color}|
|1M|1552|2072|{color:green}+33%{color}|
|2M|1488|1559|{color:green}5%{color}|
|4M|1596|1831|{color:green}13%{color}|
|16M|1563|1964|{color:green}21%{color}|
|64M|1494|2442|{color:green}39%{color}|
|128M|1469|2445|{color:green}40%{color}|
For small buffer sizes, intermediate byte[] copies is preferable. However,
FileChannel method performs pretty much consistently, irregardless of the
buffer size (except for the first run), while the byte[] approach degrades a
lot, as the buffer size increases.
I think, given these results, we can use the FileChannel method w/ a chunk size
of 4 (or even 2) MB, to be on the safe side and don't eat up too much RAM?
> FSDirectory.copy() impl is unsafe
> -
>
> Key: LUCENE-2537
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2537
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Store
>Reporter: Shai Erera
>Assignee: Shai Erera
> Fix For: 3.1, 4.0
>
> Attachments: FileCopyTest.java
>
>
> There are a couple of issues with it:
> # FileChannel.transferFrom documents that it may not copy the number of bytes
> requested, however we don't check the return value. So need to fix the code
> to read in a loop until all bytes were copied..
> # When calling addIndexes() w/ very large segments (few hundred MBs in size),
> I ran into the following exception (Java 1.6 -- Java 1.5's exception was
> cryptic):
> {code}
> Exception in thread "main" java.io.IOException: Map failed
> at sun.nio.ch.FileChannelImpl.map(FileChannelImpl.java:770)
> at
> sun.nio.ch.FileChannelImpl.transferToTrustedChannel(FileChannelImpl.java:450)
> at sun.nio.ch.FileChannelImpl.transferTo(FileChannelImpl.java:523)
> at org.apache.lucene.store.FSDirectory.copy(FSDirectory.java:450)
> at org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.addIndexes(IndexWriter.java:3019)
> Caused by: java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: Map failed
> at sun.nio.ch.FileChannelImpl.map0(Native Method)
> at sun.nio.ch.FileChannelImpl.map(FileChannelImpl.java:767)
> ... 7 more
> {code}
> I changed the impl to something like this:
> {code}
> long numWritten = 0;
> long numToWrite = input.size();
> long bufSize = 1 << 26;
> while (numWritten < numToWrite) {
> numWritten += output.transferFrom(input, numWritten, bufSize);
> }
> {code}
> And the code successfully adds the indexes. This code uses chunks of 64MB,
> however that might be too large for some applications, so we definitely need
> a smaller one. The question is how small so that performance won't be
> affected, and it'd be great if we can let it be configurable, however since
> that API is called by other API, such as addIndexes, not sure it's easily
> controllable.
> Also, I read somewhere (can't remember now where) that on Linux the native
> impl is better and does copy in chunks. So perhaps we should make a Linux
> specific impl?
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
