## Problem
This test was disabled.
## Summary of changes
- Remove the skip marker.
- Explicitly avoid doing compaction & gc during checkpoints (the default
scale doesn't do anything here, but when experimeting with larger scales
it messes things up)
- Set a data size that gives a ~20s runtime on a Hetzner dev machine,
previous one gave very noisy results because it was so small
For reference on a Hetzner AX102:
```
------------------------------ Benchmark results -------------------------------
test_bulk_insert[neon-release-pg16].insert: 25.664 s
test_bulk_insert[neon-release-pg16].pageserver_writes: 5,428 MB
test_bulk_insert[neon-release-pg16].peak_mem: 577 MB
test_bulk_insert[neon-release-pg16].size: 0 MB
test_bulk_insert[neon-release-pg16].data_uploaded: 1,922 MB
test_bulk_insert[neon-release-pg16].num_files_uploaded: 8
test_bulk_insert[neon-release-pg16].wal_written: 1,382 MB
test_bulk_insert[neon-release-pg16].wal_recovery: 25.373 s
test_bulk_insert[neon-release-pg16].compaction: 0.035 s
```
## Problem
Migrations of tenant shards with cold secondaries are holding up drains
in during production deployments.
## Summary of changes
If a secondary locations is lagging by more than 256MiB (configurable,
but that's the default), then skip cutting it over to the secondary as part of the node drain.
## Problem
The controller scale test does random migrations. These mutate secondary
locations, and therefore can cause secondary optimizations to happen in
the background, violating the test's expectation that consistency_check
will work as there are no reconciliations running.
Example:
https://neon-github-public-dev.s3.amazonaws.com/reports/main/10247161379/index.html#suites/07874de07c4a1c9effe0d92da7755ebf/6316beacd3fb3060/
## Summary of changes
- Only migrate to existing secondary locations, not randomly picked
nodes, so that we can do a fast reconcile_until_idle (otherwise
reconcile_until_idle is takes a long time to create new secondary
locations).
- Do a reconcile_until_idle before consistency_check.
## Problem
> Currently, long-running LR tests recreate endpoints every night. We'd
like to have along-running buildup of history to exercise the pageserver
in this case (instead of "unit-testing" the same behavior everynight).
Closes#8317
## Summary of changes
- Update Postgres version for replication tests
- Set `BENCHMARK_PROJECT_ID_PUB`/`BENCHMARK_PROJECT_ID_SUB` env vars to
projects that were created for this purpose
---------
Co-authored-by: Sasha Krassovsky <krassovskysasha@gmail.com>
## Problem
Re-attach blocks the pageserver http server from starting up. Hence, it
can't reply to heartbeats
until that's done. This makes the storage controller mark the node
off-line (not good). We worked
around this by setting the interval after which nodes are marked offline
to 5 minutes. This isn't a
long term solution.
## Summary of changes
* Introduce a new `NodeAvailability` state: `WarmingUp`. This state
models the following time interval:
* From receiving the re-attach request until the pageserver replies to
the first heartbeat post re-attach
* The heartbeat delta generator becomes aware of this state and uses a
separate longer interval
* Flag `max-warming-up-interval` now models the longer timeout and
`max-offline-interval` the shorter one to
match the names of the states
Closes https://github.com/neondatabase/neon/issues/7552
## Problem
In `test_basebackup_with_high_slru_count`, the pageserver is sometimes
mysteriously hanging on startup, having been started+stopped earlier in
the test setup while populating template tenant data.
- #7586
We can't see why this is hanging in this particular test. The test does
some weird stuff though, like attaching a load of broken tenants and
then doing a SIGQUIT kill of a pageserver.
## Summary of changes
- Attach tenants normally instead of doing a failpoint dance to attach
them as broken
- Shut the pageserver down gracefully during init instead of using
immediate mode
- Remove the "sequential" variant of the unstable test, as this is going
away soon anyway
- Log before trying to acquire lock file, so that if it hangs we have a
clearer sense of if that's really where it's hanging. It seems like it
is, but that code does a non-blocking flock so it's surprising.
When `NeonEnv.from_repo_dir` was introduced, storage controller stored
its
state exclusively `attachments.json`.
Since then, it has moved to using Postgres, which stores its state in
`storage_controller_db`.
But `NeonEnv.from_repo_dir` wasn't adjusted to do this.
This PR rectifies the situation.
Context for this is failures in
`test_pageserver_characterize_throughput_with_n_tenants`
CF:
https://neondb.slack.com/archives/C033RQ5SPDH/p1721035799502239?thread_ts=1720901332.293769&cid=C033RQ5SPDH
Notably, `from_repo_dir` is also used by the backwards- and
forwards-compatibility.
Thus, the changes in this PR affect those tests as well.
However, it turns out that the compatibility snapshot already contains
the `storage_controller_db`.
Thus, it should just work and in fact we can remove hacks like
`fixup_storage_controller`.
Follow-ups created as part of this work:
* https://github.com/neondatabase/neon/issues/8399
* https://github.com/neondatabase/neon/issues/8400
This test reproduces the case of a writer creating a deep stack of L0
layers. It uses realistic layer sizes and writes several gigabytes of
data, therefore runs as a performance test although it is validating
memory footprint rather than performance per se.
It acts a regression test for two recent fixes:
- https://github.com/neondatabase/neon/pull/8401
- https://github.com/neondatabase/neon/pull/8391
In future it will demonstrate the larger improvement of using a k-merge
iterator for L0 compaction (#8184)
This test can be extended to enforce limits on the memory consumption of
other housekeeping steps, by restarting the pageserver and then running
other things to do the same "how much did RSS increase" measurement.
These tests will help verify that replication, both physical and
logical, works as expected in Neon.
Co-authored-by: Sasha Krassovsky <sasha@neon.tech>
## Problem
When generations were new, these messages were an important way of
noticing if something unexpected was going on. We found some real issues
when investigating tests that unexpectedly tripped them.
At time has gone on, this code is now pretty battle-tested, and as we do
more live migrations etc, it's fairly normal to see the occasional
message from a node with a stale generation.
At this point the cognitive load on developers to selectively allow-list
these logs outweighs the benefit of having them at warn severity.
Closes: https://github.com/neondatabase/neon/issues/8080
## Summary of changes
- Downgrade "Dropped remote consistent LSN updates" and "Dropping stale
deletions" messages to INFO
- Remove all the allow-list entries for these logs.
we want to run some specific pagebench test cases on dedicated hardware
to get reproducible results
run1: 1 client per tenant => characterize throughput with n tenants.
- 500 tenants
- scale 13 (200 MB database)
- 1 hour duration
- ca 380 GB layer snapshot files
run2.singleclient: 1 client per tenant => characterize latencies
run2.manyclient: N clients per tenant => characterize throughput
scalability within one tenant.
- 1 tenant with 1 client for latencies
- 1 tenant with 64 clients because typically for a high number of
connections we recommend the connection pooler
which by default uses 64 connections (for scalability)
- scale 136 (2048 MB database)
- 20 minutes each
Adds manual compaction trigger; add gc compaction to test_gc_feedback
Part of https://github.com/neondatabase/neon/issues/8002
```
test_gc_feedback[debug-pg15].logical_size: 50 Mb
test_gc_feedback[debug-pg15].physical_size: 2269 Mb
test_gc_feedback[debug-pg15].physical/logical ratio: 44.5302
test_gc_feedback[debug-pg15].max_total_num_of_deltas: 7
test_gc_feedback[debug-pg15].max_num_of_deltas_above_image: 2
test_gc_feedback[debug-pg15].logical_size_after_bottom_most_compaction: 50 Mb
test_gc_feedback[debug-pg15].physical_size_after_bottom_most_compaction: 287 Mb
test_gc_feedback[debug-pg15].physical/logical ratio after bottom_most_compaction: 5.6312
test_gc_feedback[debug-pg15].max_total_num_of_deltas_after_bottom_most_compaction: 4
test_gc_feedback[debug-pg15].max_num_of_deltas_above_image_after_bottom_most_compaction: 1
```
## Summary of changes
* Add the manual compaction trigger
* Use in test_gc_feedback
* Add a guard to avoid running it with retain_lsns
* Fix: Do `schedule_compaction_update` after compaction
* Fix: Supply deltas in the correct order to reconstruct value
---------
Signed-off-by: Alex Chi Z <chi@neon.tech>
## Problem
- `test_storage_controller_many_tenants` can fail with warnings in the
storage controller about tenant creation holding a lock for too long,
because this test stresses the machine running the test with many
concurrent timeline creations
- `test_tenant_delete_smoke` can fail when synthetic remote storage
errors show up
## Summary of changes
- tolerate warnings about slow timeline creation in
test_storage_controller_many_tenants
- tolerate both possible errors during error_tolerant_delete
In #7957 we enabled deletion without attachment, but retained the
old-style deletion (return 202, delete in background) for attached
tenants. In this PR, we remove the old-style deletion path, such that if
the tenant delete API is invoked while a tenant is detached, it is
simply detached before completing the deletion.
This intentionally doesn't rip out all the old deletion code: in case a
deletion was in progress at time of upgrade, we keep around the code for
finishing it for one release cycle. The rest of the code removal happens
in https://github.com/neondatabase/neon/pull/8091
Now that deletion will always be via the new path, the new path is also
updated to use some retries around remote storage operations, to
tripping up the control plane with 500s if S3 has an intermittent issue.
## Problem
see https://github.com/neondatabase/neon/issues/8070
## Summary of changes
the neon_local subcommands to
- start neon
- start pageserver
- start safekeeper
- start storage controller
get a new option -t=xx or --start-timeout=xx which allows to specify a
longer timeout in seconds we wait for the process start.
This is useful in test cases where the pageserver has to read a lot of
layer data, like in pagebench test cases.
In addition we exploit the new timeout option in the python test
infrastructure (python fixtures) and modify the flaky testcase to
increase the timeout from 10 seconds to 1 minute.
Example from the test execution
```bash
RUST_BACKTRACE=1 NEON_ENV_BUILDER_USE_OVERLAYFS_FOR_SNAPSHOTS=1 DEFAULT_PG_VERSION=15 BUILD_TYPE=release ./scripts/pytest test_runner/performance/pageserver/pagebench/test_pageserver_max_throughput_getpage_at_latest_lsn.py
...
2024-06-19 09:29:34.590 INFO [neon_fixtures.py:1513] Running command "/instance_store/neon/target/release/neon_local storage_controller start --start-timeout=60s"
2024-06-19 09:29:36.365 INFO [broker.py:34] starting storage_broker to listen incoming connections at "127.0.0.1:15001"
2024-06-19 09:29:36.365 INFO [neon_fixtures.py:1513] Running command "/instance_store/neon/target/release/neon_local pageserver start --id=1 --start-timeout=60s"
2024-06-19 09:29:36.366 INFO [neon_fixtures.py:1513] Running command "/instance_store/neon/target/release/neon_local safekeeper start 1 --start-timeout=60s"
```
## Problem
`test_pageserver_max_throughput_getpage_at_latest_lsn` is a pagebench
testcase which creates several tenants/timelines to verify pageserver
performance.
The test swaps environments around in the tenant duplication stage, so
the storage controller uses two separate db instances (one in the
duplication stage and another one in the benchmarking stage).
In the benchmarking stage, the storage controller starts without any
knowledge of nodes, but with knowledge of tenants (via
attachments.json). When we re-attach and attempt to update the scheduler
stats, the scheduler rightfully complains
about the node not being known. The setup should preserve the storage
controller across the two envs, but i think it's fine to just allow list
the error in this case.
## Summary of changes
add the error message
`2024-06-19T09:38:27.866085Z ERROR Scheduler missing node 1``
to the list of allowed errors for storage_controller
## Problem
halfvec data type was introduced in pgvector 0.7.0 and is popular
because
it allows smaller vectors, smaller indexes and potentially better
performance.
So far we have not tested halfvec in our periodic performance tests.
This PR adds halfvec indexing and halfvec queries to the test.
## Problem
Testcase page bench test_pageserver_max_throughput_getpage_at_latest_lsn
had been deactivated because it was flaky.
We now ignore copy fail error messages like in
270d3be507/test_runner/regress/test_pageserver_getpage_throttle.py (L17-L20)
and want to reactivate it to see it it is still flaky
## Summary of changes
- reactivate the test in CI
- ignore CopyFail error message during page bench test cases
## Checklist before requesting a review
- [ ] I have performed a self-review of my code.
- [ ] If it is a core feature, I have added thorough tests.
- [ ] Do we need to implement analytics? if so did you add the relevant
metrics to the dashboard?
- [ ] If this PR requires public announcement, mark it with
/release-notes label and add several sentences in this section.
## Checklist before merging
- [ ] Do not forget to reformat commit message to not include the above
checklist
A simple API to collect some statistics after compaction to easily
understand the result.
The tool reads the layer map, and analyze range by range instead of
doing single-key operations, which is more efficient than doing a
benchmark to collect the result. It currently computes two key metrics:
* Latest data access efficiency, which finds how many delta layers /
image layers the system needs to iterate before returning any key in a
key range.
* (Approximate) PiTR efficiency, as in
https://github.com/neondatabase/neon/issues/7770, which is simply the
number of delta files in the range. The reason behind that is, assume no
image layer is created, PiTR efficiency is simply the cost of collect
records from the delta layers, and the replay time. Number of delta
files (or in the future, estimated size of reads) is a simple yet
efficient way of estimating how much effort the page server needs to
reconstruct a page.
Signed-off-by: Alex Chi Z <chi@neon.tech>
## Problem
We want to regularly verify the performance of pgvector HNSW parallel
index builds and parallel similarity search using HNSW indexes.
The first release that considerably improved the index-build parallelism
was pgvector 0.7.0 and we want to make sure that we do not regress by
our neon compute VM settings (swap, memory over commit, pg conf etc.)
## Summary of changes
Prepare a Neon project with 1 million openAI vector embeddings (vector
size 1536).
Run HNSW indexing operations in the regression test for the various
distance metrics.
Run similarity queries using pgbench with 100 concurrent clients.
I have also added the relevant metrics to the grafana dashboards pgbench
and olape
---------
Co-authored-by: Alexander Bayandin <alexander@neon.tech>
## Problem
Currently tenants are only split into multiple shards if a human being
calls the API to do it.
Issue: #7388
## Summary of changes
- Add a pageserver API for returning the top tenants by size
- Add a step to the controller's background loop where if there is no
reconciliation or optimization to be done, it looks for things to split.
- Add a test that runs pgbench on many tenants concurrently, and checks
that splitting happens as expected as tenants grow, without interrupting
the client I/O.
This PR is quite basic: there is a tasklist in
https://github.com/neondatabase/neon/issues/7388 for further work. This
PR is meant to be safe (off by default), and sufficient to enable our
staging environment to run lots of sharded tenants without a human
having to set them up.
## Problem
Storage controller was using a zero layer count in SecondaryProgress as
a proxy for "not initialized". However, in tenants with zero timelines
(a legitimate state), the layer count remains zero forever.
This caused https://github.com/neondatabase/neon/pull/7583 to
destabilize the storage controller scale test, which creates lots of
tenants, some of which don't get any timelines.
## Summary of changes
- Use a None mtime instead of zero layer count to determine if a
SecondaryProgress should be ignored.
- Adjust the test to use a shorter heatmap upload period to let it
proceed faster while waiting for scheduling optimizations to complete.
Preceding PR https://github.com/neondatabase/neon/pull/7613 reduced the
usage of `--pageserver-config-override`.
This PR builds on top of that work and fully removes the `neon_local
--pageserver-config-override`.
Tests that need a non-default `pageserver.toml` control it using two
options:
1. Specify `NeonEnvBuilder.pageserver_config_override` before
`NeonEnvBuilder.init_start()`. This uses a new `neon_local init
--pageserver-config` flag.
2. After `init_start()`: `env.pageserver.stop()` +
`NeonPageserver.edit_config_toml()` + `env.pageserver.start()`
A few test cases were using
`env.pageserver.start(overrides=("--pageserver-config-override...",))`.
I changed them to use one of the options above.
Future Work
-----------
The `neon_local init --pageserver-config` flag still uses `pageserver
--config-override` under the hood. In the future, neon_local should just
write the `pageserver.toml` directly.
The `NeonEnvBuilder.pageserver_config_override` field should be renamed
to `pageserver_initial_config`. Let's save this churn for a separate
refactor commit.
## Problem
Storage controller was observed to have unexpectedly large memory
consumption when loaded with many thousands of shards.
This was recently fixed:
- https://github.com/neondatabase/neon/pull/7493
...but we need a general test that the controller is well behaved with
thousands of shards.
Closes: https://github.com/neondatabase/neon/issues/7460
Closes: https://github.com/neondatabase/neon/issues/7463
## Summary of changes
- Add test test_storage_controller_many_tenants to exercise the system's
behaviour with a more substantial workload. This test measures memory
consumption and reproduces #7460 before the other changes in this PR.
- Tweak reconcile_all's return value to make it nonzero if it spawns no
reconcilers, but _would_ have spawned some reconcilers if they weren't
blocked by the reconcile concurrency limit. This makes the test's
reconcile_until_idle behave as expected (i.e. not complete until the
system is nice and calm).
- Fix an issue where tenant migrations would leave a spurious secondary
location when migrated to some location that was not already their
secondary (this was an existing low-impact bug that tripped up the
test's consistency checks).
On the test with 8000 shards, the resident memory per shard is about
20KiB. This is not really per-shard memory: the primary source of memory
growth is the number of concurrent network/db clients we create.
With 8000 shards, the test takes 125s to run on my workstation.
Not a user-facing change, but can break any existing `.neon` directories
created by neon_local, as the name of the database used by the storage
controller changes.
This PR changes all the locations apart from the path of
`control_plane/attachment_service` (waiting for an opportune moment to
do that one, because it's the most conflict-ish wrt ongoing PRs like
#6676 )
## Problem
We reverted https://github.com/neondatabase/neon/pull/6661 a few days
ago. The change led to OOMs in
benchmarks followed by large WAL reingests.
The issue was that we removed [this
code](d04af08567/pageserver/src/tenant/timeline/walreceiver/walreceiver_connection.rs (L409-L417)).
That call may trigger a roll of the open layer due to
the keepalive messages received from the safekeeper. Removing it meant
that enforcing
of checkpoint timeout became even more lax and led to using up large
amounts of memory
for the in memory layer indices.
## Summary of changes
Piggyback on keep alive messages to enforce checkpoint timeout. This is
a hack, but it's exactly what
the current code is doing.
## Alternatives
Christhian, Joonas and myself sketched out a timer based approach
[here](https://github.com/neondatabase/neon/pull/6940). While discussing
it further, it became obvious that's also a bit of a hack and not the
desired end state. I chose not
to take that further since it's not what we ultimately want and it'll be
harder to rip out.
Right now it's unclear what the ideal system behaviour is:
* early flushing on memory pressure, or ...
* detaching tenants on memory pressure
We have a benchmark for creating a lot of branches, but it does random
things, and the branch count is not what we is the largest maximum we
aim to support. If this PR would stabilize the benchmark total duration
it means that there are some structures which are very much slower than
others. Then we should add a seed-outputting variant to help find and
reproduce such cases.
Additionally, record for the benchmark:
- shutdown duration
- startup metrics once done (on restart)
- duration of first compaction completion via debug logging
## Problem
The vectored read path proposed in
https://github.com/neondatabase/neon/pull/6576 seems
to be functionally correct, but in my testing (see below) it is about 10-20% slower than the naive
sequential vectored implementation.
## Summary of changes
There's three parts to this PR:
1. Supporting vectored blob reads. This is actually trickier than it
sounds because on disk blobs are prefixed with a variable length size header.
Since the blobs are not necessarily fixed size, we need to juggle the offsets
such that the callers can retrieve the blobs from the resulting buffer.
2. Merge disk read requests issued by the vectored read path up to a
maximum size. Again, the merging is complicated by the fact that blobs
are not fixed size. We keep track of the begin and end offset of each blob
and pass them into the vectored blob reader. In turn, the reader will return
a buffer and the offsets at which the blobs begin and end.
3. A benchmark for basebackup requests against tenant with large SLRU
block counts is added. This required a small change to pagebench and a new config
variable for the pageserver which toggles the vectored get validation.
We can probably optimise things further by adding a little bit of
concurrency for our IO. In principle, it's as simple as spawning a task which deals with issuing
IO and doing the serialisation and handling on the parent task which receives input via a
channel.
This reverts commits 587cb705b8 (PR #6661)
and fcbe9fb184 (PR #6842).
Conflicts:
pageserver/src/tenant.rs
pageserver/src/tenant/timeline.rs
The conflicts were with
* pageserver: adjust checkpoint distance for sharded tenants (#6852)
* pageserver: add vectored get implementation (#6576)
Also we had to keep the `allowed_errors` to make `test_forward_compatibility` happy,
see the PR thread on GitHub for details.
It's been dead-code-at-runtime for 9 months, let's remove it.
We can always re-introduce it at a later point.
Came across this while working on #6861, which will touch
`time_for_new_image_layer`. This is an opporunity to make that function
simpler.
587cb705b8
changed the layer rolling logic to more closely obey the
`checkpoint_distance` config. Previously, this test was getting
layers significantly larger than the 8K it was asking for. Now the
payload in the layers is closer to 8K (which means more layers in
total).
Tweak the `checkpoint_distance` to get a number of layers more
reasonable for this test. Note that we still get more layers than
before (~8K vs ~5K).
## Problem
`test_pageserver_max_throughput_getpage_at_latest_lsn` is flaky which
makes CI status red pretty frequently. `benchmarks` is not a blocking
job (doesn't block `deploy`), so having it red might hide failures in
other jobs
Ref: https://github.com/neondatabase/neon/issues/6724
## Summary of changes
- Disable `test_pageserver_max_throughput_getpage_at_latest_lsn` on CI
until it fixed
## Problem
See https://github.com/neondatabase/cloud/issues/8673
## Summary of changes
Download missed SLRU segments from page server
## Checklist before requesting a review
- [ ] I have performed a self-review of my code.
- [ ] If it is a core feature, I have added thorough tests.
- [ ] Do we need to implement analytics? if so did you add the relevant
metrics to the dashboard?
- [ ] If this PR requires public announcement, mark it with
/release-notes label and add several sentences in this section.
## Checklist before merging
- [ ] Do not forget to reformat commit message to not include the above
checklist
---------
Co-authored-by: Konstantin Knizhnik <knizhnik@neon.tech>
Co-authored-by: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki@neon.tech>
