Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
NEW: Monitor These Apps!
elasticsearch, apache solr, apache hbase, hadoop, redis, casssandra, amazon cloudwatch, mysql, memcached, apache kafka, apache zookeeper, apache storm, ubuntu, centOS, red hat, debian, puppet labs, java, senseiDB
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Threaded View
Accumulo >> mail # user >> WAL - rate limiting factor x4.67


Copy link to this message
-
Re: WAL - rate limiting factor x4.67
How many concurrent writers do you have?  I made some other comments below
inline.
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 10:53 AM, Peter Tillotson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:

> Keith
>
> I tried tserver.mutation.queue.max=4M and it improved but by no where near
> a significant difference. I my app records get turned into multiple
> Accumulo rows.
>
> So in terms of my record write rate.
>
> wal=true  & mutation.queue.max = 256K    |   ~8K records/s
> wal=true & mutation.queue.max = 4M        |   ~14K records/s
>

Do you know if its plateaued?  If you increase this further (like 8M), is
the rate the same?
> wal=false                                                 |   ~25K
> records/s
>
> Adam,
>
> Its one box so replication is off, good thought tnx.
>
> BTW - I've been plying around with ZFS compression vs Accumulo Snappy.
> What I've found was quite interesting. The idea was that with ZFS dedup and
> being in charge of compression I'd get a boost later on when blocks merge.
> What I've found is that after a while with ZFS LZ4 the CPU and disk all
> tail off, as though timeouts are elapsing somewhere whereas SNAPPY
> maintains an average ~20k+.
>

W/ this strategy the data will not be compressed when going between the
tserver and datanode OR the datanode and OS.
>
> Anyway tnx and if I get a chance I may the 1.7 branch for the fix.
>

Nothing was done in 1.7 for this issue yet.
>
>
>
>   On Wednesday, 4 December 2013, 14:56, Adam Fuchs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>  One thing you can do is reduce the replication factor for the WAL. We
> have found that makes a pretty significant different in write performance.
> That can be modified with the tserver.wal.replication property. Setting it
> to 2 instead of the default (probably 3) should give you some performance
> improvement, of course at some cost to durability.
>
> Adam
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 5:14 AM, Peter Tillotson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
> I've been trying to get the most out of streaming data into Accumulo 1.5
> (Hadoop Cloudera CDH4). Having tried a number of settings, re-writing
> client code etc I finally switched off the Write Ahead Log
> (table.walog.enabled=false) and saw a huge leap in ingest performance.
>
> Ingest with table.walog.enabled= true:   ~6 MB/s
> Ingest with table.walog.enabled= false:  ~28 MB/s
>
> That is a factor of about x4.67 speed improvement.
>
> Now my use case could probably live without or work around not having a
> wal, but I wondered if this was a known issue??
> (didn't see anything in jira), wal seem to be a significant rate limiter
> this is either endemic to Accumulo or an HDFS / setup issue. Though given
> everything is in HDFS these days and otherwise IO flies it looks like
> Accumulo WAL is the most likely culprit.
>
> I don't believe this to be an IO issue on the box, with wal off the is
> significantly more IO (up to 80M/s reported by dstat), with wal on (up to
> 12M/s reported by dstat). Testing the box with FIO sequential write is
> 160M/s.
>
> Further info:
> Hadoop 2.00 (Cloudera cdh4)
> Accumulo (1.5.0)
> Zookeeper ( with Netty, minor improvement of <1MB/s  )
> Filesystem ( HDFS is ZFS, compression=on, dedup=on, otherwise ext4 )
>
> With large imports from scratch now I start off CPU bound and as more
> shuffling is needed this becomes Disk bound later in the import as
> expected. So I know pre-splitting would probably sort it.
>
> Tnx
>
> P
>
>
>
>
>
NEW: Monitor These Apps!
elasticsearch, apache solr, apache hbase, hadoop, redis, casssandra, amazon cloudwatch, mysql, memcached, apache kafka, apache zookeeper, apache storm, ubuntu, centOS, red hat, debian, puppet labs, java, senseiDB