Commit Graph

3 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Alexander Bayandin
023821a80c test_page_service_batching: fix non-numeric metrics (#9998)
## Problem

```
2024-12-03T15:42:46.5978335Z + poetry run python /__w/neon/neon/scripts/ingest_perf_test_result.py --ingest /__w/neon/neon/test_runner/perf-report-local
2024-12-03T15:42:49.5325077Z Traceback (most recent call last):
2024-12-03T15:42:49.5325603Z   File "/__w/neon/neon/scripts/ingest_perf_test_result.py", line 165, in <module>
2024-12-03T15:42:49.5326029Z     main()
2024-12-03T15:42:49.5326316Z   File "/__w/neon/neon/scripts/ingest_perf_test_result.py", line 155, in main
2024-12-03T15:42:49.5326739Z     ingested = ingest_perf_test_result(cur, item, recorded_at_timestamp)
2024-12-03T15:42:49.5327488Z                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
2024-12-03T15:42:49.5327914Z   File "/__w/neon/neon/scripts/ingest_perf_test_result.py", line 99, in ingest_perf_test_result
2024-12-03T15:42:49.5328321Z     psycopg2.extras.execute_values(
2024-12-03T15:42:49.5328940Z   File "/github/home/.cache/pypoetry/virtualenvs/non-package-mode-_pxWMzVK-py3.11/lib/python3.11/site-packages/psycopg2/extras.py", line 1299, in execute_values
2024-12-03T15:42:49.5335618Z     cur.execute(b''.join(parts))
2024-12-03T15:42:49.5335967Z psycopg2.errors.InvalidTextRepresentation: invalid input syntax for type numeric: "concurrent-futures"
2024-12-03T15:42:49.5336287Z LINE 57:             'concurrent-futures',
2024-12-03T15:42:49.5336462Z                      ^
```

## Summary of changes
- `test_page_service_batching`: save non-numeric params as `labels`
- Add a runtime check that `metric_value` is NUMERIC
2024-12-03 22:46:18 +00:00
Christian Schwarz
cb10be710d page_service: batching observability & include throttled time in smgr metrics (#9870)
This PR 

- fixes smgr metrics https://github.com/neondatabase/neon/issues/9925 
- adds an additional startup log line logging the current batching
config
- adds a histogram of batch sizes global and per-tenant
- adds a metric exposing the current batching config

The issue described #9925 is that before this PR, request latency was
only observed *after* batching.
This means that smgr latency metrics (most importantly getpage latency)
don't account for
- `wait_lsn` time 
- time spent waiting for batch to fill up / the executor stage to pick
up the batch.

The fix is to use a per-request batching timer, like we did before the
initial batching PR.
We funnel those timers through the entire request lifecycle.

I noticed that even before the initial batching changes, we weren't
accounting for the time spent writing & flushing the response to the
wire.
This PR drive-by fixes that deficiency by dropping the timers at the
very end of processing the batch, i.e., after the `pgb.flush()` call.

I was **unable to maintain the behavior that we deduct
time-spent-in-throttle from various latency metrics.
The reason is that we're using a *single* counter in `RequestContext` to
track micros spent in throttle.
But there are *N* metrics timers in the batch, one per request.
As a consequence, the practice of consuming the counter in the drop
handler of each timer no longer works because all but the first timer
will encounter error `close() called on closed state`.
A failed attempt to maintain the current behavior can be found in
https://github.com/neondatabase/neon/pull/9951.

So, this PR remvoes the deduction behavior from all metrics.
I started a discussion on Slack about it the implications this has for
our internal SLO calculation:
https://neondb.slack.com/archives/C033RQ5SPDH/p1732910861704029

# Refs

- fixes https://github.com/neondatabase/neon/issues/9925
- sub-issue https://github.com/neondatabase/neon/issues/9377
- epic: https://github.com/neondatabase/neon/issues/9376
2024-12-03 11:03:23 +00:00
Christian Schwarz
aa4ec11af9 page_service: rewrite batching to work without a timeout (#9851)
# Problem

The timeout-based batching adds latency to unbatchable workloads.

We can choose a short batching timeout (e.g. 10us) but that requires
high-resolution timers, which tokio doesn't have.
I thoroughly explored options to use OS timers (see
[this](https://github.com/neondatabase/neon/pull/9822) abandoned PR).
In short, it's not an attractive option because any timer implementation
adds non-trivial overheads.

# Solution

The insight is that, in the steady state of a batchable workload, the
time we spend in `get_vectored` will be hundreds of microseconds anyway.

If we prepare the next batch concurrently to `get_vectored`, we will
have a sizeable batch ready once `get_vectored` of the current batch is
done and do not need an explicit timeout.

This can be reasonably described as **pipelining of the protocol
handler**.

# Implementation

We model the sub-protocol handler for pagestream requests
(`handle_pagrequests`) as two futures that form a pipeline:

2. Batching: read requests from the connection and fill the current
batch
3. Execution: `take` the current batch, execute it using `get_vectored`,
and send the response.

The Reading and Batching stage are connected through a new type of
channel called `spsc_fold`.

See the long comment in the `handle_pagerequests_pipelined` for details.

# Changes

- Refactor `handle_pagerequests`
    - separate functions for
- reading one protocol message; produces a `BatchedFeMessage` with just
one page request in it
- batching; tried to merge an incoming `BatchedFeMessage` into an
existing `BatchedFeMessage`; returns `None` on success and returns back
the incoming message in case merging isn't possible
        - execution of a batched message
- unify the timeline handle acquisition & request span construction; it
now happen in the function that reads the protocol message
- Implement serial and pipelined model
    - serial: what we had before any of the batching changes
      - read one protocol message
      - execute protocol messages
    - pipelined: the design described above
- optionality for execution of the pipeline: either via concurrent
futures vs tokio tasks
- Pageserver config
  - remove batching timeout field
  - add ability to configure pipelining mode
- add ability to limit max batch size for pipelined configurations
(required for the rollout, cf
https://github.com/neondatabase/cloud/issues/20620 )
  - ability to configure execution mode
- Tests
  - remove `batch_timeout` parametrization
  - rename `test_getpage_merge_smoke` to `test_throughput`
- add parametrization to test different max batch sizes and execution
moes
  - rename `test_timer_precision` to `test_latency`
  - rename the test case file to `test_page_service_batching.py`
  - better descriptions of what the tests actually do

## On the holding The `TimelineHandle` in the pending batch

While batching, we hold the `TimelineHandle` in the pending batch.
Therefore, the timeline will not finish shutting down while we're
batching.

This is not a problem in practice because the concurrently ongoing
`get_vectored` call will fail quickly with an error indicating that the
timeline is shutting down.
This results in the Execution stage returning a `QueryError::Shutdown`,
which causes the pipeline / entire page service connection to shut down.
This drops all references to the
`Arc<Mutex<Option<Box<BatchedFeMessage>>>>` object, thereby dropping the
contained `TimelineHandle`s.

- => fixes https://github.com/neondatabase/neon/issues/9850

# Performance

Local run of the benchmarks, results in [this empty
commit](1cf5b1463f)
in the PR branch.

Key take-aways:
* `concurrent-futures` and `tasks` deliver identical `batching_factor`
* tail latency impact unknown, cf
https://github.com/neondatabase/neon/issues/9837
* `concurrent-futures` has higher throughput than `tasks` in all
workloads (=lower `time` metric)
* In unbatchable workloads, `concurrent-futures` has 5% higher
`CPU-per-throughput` than that of `tasks`, and 15% higher than that of
`serial`.
* In batchable-32 workload, `concurrent-futures` has 8% lower
`CPU-per-throughput` than that of `tasks` (comparison to tput of
`serial` is irrelevant)
* in unbatchable workloads, mean and tail latencies of
`concurrent-futures` is practically identical to `serial`, whereas
`tasks` adds 20-30us of overhead

Overall, `concurrent-futures` seems like a slightly more attractive
choice.

# Rollout

This change is disabled-by-default.

Rollout plan:
- https://github.com/neondatabase/cloud/issues/20620

# Refs

- epic: https://github.com/neondatabase/neon/issues/9376
- this sub-task: https://github.com/neondatabase/neon/issues/9377
- the abandoned attempt to improve batching timeout resolution:
https://github.com/neondatabase/neon/pull/9820
- closes https://github.com/neondatabase/neon/issues/9850
- fixes https://github.com/neondatabase/neon/issues/9835
2024-11-30 00:16:24 +00:00