Thanks for sharing this. Great work. I don't see any reason why we cannot backport to branch-1.
Enis On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 9:37 AM, Andrew Purtell <andrew.purt...@gmail.com> wrote: > Yes, please, the patches will be useful to the community even if we decide > not to backport into an official 1.x release. > > > > On Nov 18, 2016, at 12:25 PM, Bryan Beaudreault < > bbeaudrea...@hubspot.com> wrote: > > > > Is the backported patch available anywhere? Not seeing it on the > referenced > > JIRA. If it ends up not getting officially backported to branch-1 due to > > 2.0 around the corner, some of us who build our own deploy may want to > > integrate into our builds. Thanks! These numbers look great > > > >> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 12:20 PM Anoop John <anoop.hb...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > >> Hi Yu Li > >> Good to see that the off heap work help you.. The perf > >> numbers looks great. So this is a compare of on heap L1 cache vs off > heap > >> L2 cache(HBASE-11425 enabled). So for 2.0 we should make L2 off heap > >> cache ON by default I believe. Will raise a jira for that we can > discuss > >> under that. Seems like L2 off heap cache for data blocks and L1 cache > for > >> index blocks seems a right choice. > >> > >> Thanks for the backport and the help in testing the feature.. You were > >> able to find some corner case bugs and helped community to fix them.. > >> Thanks goes to ur whole team. > >> > >> -Anoop- > >> > >> > >>> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 10:14 PM, Yu Li <car...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> Sorry guys, let me retry the inline images: > >>> > >>> Performance w/o offheap: > >>> > >>> > >>> Performance w/ offheap: > >>> > >>> > >>> Peak Get QPS of one single RS during Singles' Day (11/11): > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> And attach the files in case inline still not working: > >>> > >>> Performance_without_offheap.png > >>> < > >> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B017Q40_F5uwbWEzUGktYVIya3JkcXVjRkFvVG > NtM0VxWC1n/view?usp=drive_web > >>> > >>> > >>> Performance_with_offheap.png > >>> < > >> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B017Q40_F5uweGR2cnJEU0M1MWwtRFJ5YkxUeF > VrcUdPc2ww/view?usp=drive_web > >>> > >>> > >>> Peak_Get_QPS_of_Single_RS.png > >>> < > >> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B017Q40_F5uwQ2FkR2k0ZmEtRVNGSFp5RUxHM3 > F6bHpNYnJz/view?usp=drive_web > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Best Regards, > >>> Yu > >>> > >>>> On 18 November 2016 at 19:29, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Yu: > >>>> With positive results, more hbase users would be asking for the > backport > >>>> of offheap read path patches. > >>>> > >>>> Do you think you or your coworker has the bandwidth to publish > backport > >>>> for branch-1 ? > >>>> > >>>> Thanks > >>>> > >>>>> On Nov 18, 2016, at 12:11 AM, Yu Li <car...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Dear all, > >>>>> > >>>>> We have backported read path offheap (HBASE-11425) to our customized > >>>> hbase-1.1.2 (thanks @Anoop for the help/support) and run it online for > >> more > >>>> than a month, and would like to share our experience, for what it's > >> worth > >>>> (smile). > >>>>> > >>>>> Generally speaking, we gained a better and more stable > >>>> throughput/performance with offheap, and below are some details: > >>>>> 1. QPS become more stable with offheap > >>>>> > >>>>> Performance w/o offheap: > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Performance w/ offheap: > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> These data come from our online A/B test cluster (with 450 physical > >>>> machines, and each with 256G memory + 64 core) with real world > >> workloads, > >>>> it shows using offheap we could gain a more stable throughput as well > as > >>>> better performance > >>>>> > >>>>> Not showing fully online data here because for online we published > the > >>>> version with both offheap and NettyRpcServer together, so no > standalone > >>>> comparison data for offheap > >>>>> > >>>>> 2. Full GC frequency and cost > >>>>> > >>>>> Average Full GC STW time reduce from 11s to 7s with offheap. > >>>>> > >>>>> 3. Young GC frequency and cost > >>>>> > >>>>> No performance degradation observed with offheap. > >>>>> > >>>>> 4. Peak throughput of one single RS > >>>>> > >>>>> On Singles Day (11/11), peak throughput of one single RS reached > 100K, > >>>> among which 90K from Get. Plus internet in/out data we could know the > >>>> average result size of get request is ~1KB > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Offheap are used on all online machines (more than 1600 nodes) > instead > >>>> of LruCache, so the above QPS is gained from offheap bucketcache, > along > >>>> with NettyRpcServer(HBASE-15756). > >>>>> > >>>>> Just let us know if any comments. Thanks. > >>>>> > >>>>> Best Regards, > >>>>> Yu > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >> >
