Optimize Bulk Message Parsing and Message Length Parsing #39634
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
* findNextMarker took almost 1ms per invocation during the PMC rally track * Fixed to be about an order of magnitude faster by using Netty's bulk `ByteBuf` search * It is unnecessary to instantiate an object (the input stream wrapper) and throw it away, just to read the `int` length from the message bytes * Fixed by adding bulk `int` read to BytesReference
original-brownbear
added
>enhancement
:Distributed Coordination/Network
Collaborator
|
Pinging @elastic/es-distributed |
s1monw
approved these changes
Mar 5, 2019
server/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/action/search/MultiSearchRequest.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Contributor
|
Nit: this looks very similar to |
Contributor
Author
|
@jpountz you're right, it is always the length for the |
jpountz
suggested changes
Mar 5, 2019
Contributor
jpountz
left a comment
jpountz
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Let's add some tests to AbstractBytesReferenceTestCase? Other than that LGTM.
jpountz
reviewed
Mar 5, 2019
server/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/common/bytes/BytesReference.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Contributor
Author
|
@jpountz thanks!, adjusted Javadoc and added tests as requested, can you take another look? :) |
Contributor
Author
|
Small issue with the new test my bad, fixing ... |
Contributor
Author
|
@jpountz alright, sorry for the noise above. Now it's green and should be good to review :) |
jpountz
approved these changes
Mar 5, 2019
Contributor
Author
|
@jpountz thanks! |
original-brownbear
added a commit
to original-brownbear/elasticsearch
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 6, 2019
* Optimize Bulk Message Parsing and Message Length Parsing * findNextMarker took almost 1ms per invocation during the PMC rally track * Fixed to be about an order of magnitude faster by using Netty's bulk `ByteBuf` search * It is unnecessary to instantiate an object (the input stream wrapper) and throw it away, just to read the `int` length from the message bytes * Fixed by adding bulk `int` read to BytesReference
original-brownbear
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 6, 2019
…9730) * Optimize Bulk Message Parsing and Message Length Parsing * findNextMarker took almost 1ms per invocation during the PMC rally track * Fixed to be about an order of magnitude faster by using Netty's bulk `ByteBuf` search * It is unnecessary to instantiate an object (the input stream wrapper) and throw it away, just to read the `int` length from the message bytes * Fixed by adding bulk `int` read to BytesReference
original-brownbear
added a commit
to original-brownbear/elasticsearch
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 18, 2019
* Copying the request is not necessary here. We can simply release it once the response has been generated and a lot of `Unpooled` allocations that way * Relates elastic#32228 * I think the issue that preventet that PR that PR from being merged was solved by elastic#39634 that moved the bulk index marker search to ByteBuf bulk access so the composite buffer shouldn't require many additional bounds checks (I'd argue the bounds checks we add, we save when copying the composite buffer) * I couldn't neccessarily reproduce much of a speedup from this change, but I could reproduce a very measureable reduction in GC time with e.g. Rally's PMC (4g heap node and bulk requests of size 5k saw a reduction in young GC time by ~10% for me)
original-brownbear
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 3, 2019
* Copying the request is not necessary here. We can simply release it once the response has been generated and a lot of `Unpooled` allocations that way * Relates #32228 * I think the issue that preventet that PR that PR from being merged was solved by #39634 that moved the bulk index marker search to ByteBuf bulk access so the composite buffer shouldn't require many additional bounds checks (I'd argue the bounds checks we add, we save when copying the composite buffer) * I couldn't neccessarily reproduce much of a speedup from this change, but I could reproduce a very measureable reduction in GC time with e.g. Rally's PMC (4g heap node and bulk requests of size 5k saw a reduction in young GC time by ~10% for me)
original-brownbear
added a commit
to original-brownbear/elasticsearch
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 3, 2019
* Copying the request is not necessary here. We can simply release it once the response has been generated and a lot of `Unpooled` allocations that way * Relates elastic#32228 * I think the issue that preventet that PR that PR from being merged was solved by elastic#39634 that moved the bulk index marker search to ByteBuf bulk access so the composite buffer shouldn't require many additional bounds checks (I'd argue the bounds checks we add, we save when copying the composite buffer) * I couldn't neccessarily reproduce much of a speedup from this change, but I could reproduce a very measureable reduction in GC time with e.g. Rally's PMC (4g heap node and bulk requests of size 5k saw a reduction in young GC time by ~10% for me)
original-brownbear
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 4, 2019
* Copying the request is not necessary here. We can simply release it once the response has been generated and a lot of `Unpooled` allocations that way * Relates #32228 * I think the issue that preventet that PR that PR from being merged was solved by #39634 that moved the bulk index marker search to ByteBuf bulk access so the composite buffer shouldn't require many additional bounds checks (I'd argue the bounds checks we add, we save when copying the composite buffer) * I couldn't neccessarily reproduce much of a speedup from this change, but I could reproduce a very measureable reduction in GC time with e.g. Rally's PMC (4g heap node and bulk requests of size 5k saw a reduction in young GC time by ~10% for me)
SivagurunathanV
pushed a commit
to SivagurunathanV/elasticsearch
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 23, 2020
* Copying the request is not necessary here. We can simply release it once the response has been generated and a lot of `Unpooled` allocations that way * Relates elastic#32228 * I think the issue that preventet that PR that PR from being merged was solved by elastic#39634 that moved the bulk index marker search to ByteBuf bulk access so the composite buffer shouldn't require many additional bounds checks (I'd argue the bounds checks we add, we save when copying the composite buffer) * I couldn't neccessarily reproduce much of a speedup from this change, but I could reproduce a very measureable reduction in GC time with e.g. Rally's PMC (4g heap node and bulk requests of size 5k saw a reduction in young GC time by ~10% for me)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
5 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Found while profiling the impact of #39286 :
findNextMarkertook almost 1ms per invocation during the PMC rally track which comes outByteBufsearchintlength from the message bytesintread to BytesReference