New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
storage/engine: TestConcurrentBatch takes 20s+ on arm64 #15868
Comments
Possibly related to #15604. This test is flaky on my laptop too, although in my case it passes when run in isolation. |
Kind of scary that writing 16 4MB batches takes 20+ seconds. Can we do some simple I/O benchmarks on this machine?
|
|
Hmm, that seems fast enough. |
The code reads
|
@vielmetti Right, but we shouldn't be hitting that limit given how we configure RocksDB. |
I think we're just seeing the speed of the ARM processors. This is the difference in performance for one of the configurations for the
|
The |
It might be interesting to run a quick CPU profile on arm to see if there are any obvious spots for improvement. For example, we do a lot of CRC32s, both in our code and in rocksdb. Both intel and arm architectures have hardware acceleration for this (at least in recent chips), but Go and rocksdb only know how to use the intel versions. |
Looks like help is on its way for accelerated crc32's, based on https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/40074/
|
ARMv8 defines crc32 instruction. Comparing to the original crc32 calculation, this patch makes use of crc32 instructions to do crc32 calculation instead of the multiple lookup table algorithms. ARMv8 provides IEEE and Castagnoli polynomials for crc32 calculation so that the perfomance of these two types of crc32 get significant improved. name old time/op new time/op delta CRC32/poly=IEEE/size=15/align=0-32 117ns ± 0% 38ns ± 0% -67.44% CRC32/poly=IEEE/size=15/align=1-32 117ns ± 0% 38ns ± 0% -67.52% CRC32/poly=IEEE/size=40/align=0-32 129ns ± 0% 41ns ± 0% -68.37% CRC32/poly=IEEE/size=40/align=1-32 129ns ± 0% 41ns ± 0% -68.29% CRC32/poly=IEEE/size=512/align=0-32 828ns ± 0% 246ns ± 0% -70.29% CRC32/poly=IEEE/size=512/align=1-32 828ns ± 0% 132ns ± 0% -84.06% CRC32/poly=IEEE/size=1kB/align=0-32 1.58µs ± 0% 0.46µs ± 0% -70.98% CRC32/poly=IEEE/size=1kB/align=1-32 1.58µs ± 0% 0.46µs ± 0% -70.92% CRC32/poly=IEEE/size=4kB/align=0-32 6.06µs ± 0% 1.74µs ± 0% -71.27% CRC32/poly=IEEE/size=4kB/align=1-32 6.10µs ± 0% 1.74µs ± 0% -71.44% CRC32/poly=IEEE/size=32kB/align=0-32 48.3µs ± 0% 13.7µs ± 0% -71.61% CRC32/poly=IEEE/size=32kB/align=1-32 48.3µs ± 0% 13.7µs ± 0% -71.60% CRC32/poly=Castagnoli/size=15/align=0-32 116ns ± 0% 38ns ± 0% -67.07% CRC32/poly=Castagnoli/size=15/align=1-32 116ns ± 0% 38ns ± 0% -66.90% CRC32/poly=Castagnoli/size=40/align=0-32 127ns ± 0% 40ns ± 0% -68.11% CRC32/poly=Castagnoli/size=40/align=1-32 127ns ± 0% 40ns ± 0% -68.11% CRC32/poly=Castagnoli/size=512/align=0-32 828ns ± 0% 132ns ± 0% -84.06% CRC32/poly=Castagnoli/size=512/align=1-32 827ns ± 0% 132ns ± 0% -84.04% CRC32/poly=Castagnoli/size=1kB/align=0-32 1.59µs ± 0% 0.22µs ± 0% -85.89% CRC32/poly=Castagnoli/size=1kB/align=1-32 1.58µs ± 0% 0.22µs ± 0% -85.79% CRC32/poly=Castagnoli/size=4kB/align=0-32 6.14µs ± 0% 0.77µs ± 0% -87.40% CRC32/poly=Castagnoli/size=4kB/align=1-32 6.06µs ± 0% 0.77µs ± 0% -87.25% CRC32/poly=Castagnoli/size=32kB/align=0-32 48.3µs ± 0% 5.9µs ± 0% -87.71% CRC32/poly=Castagnoli/size=32kB/align=1-32 48.4µs ± 0% 6.0µs ± 0% -87.69% CRC32/poly=Koopman/size=15/align=0-32 104ns ± 0% 104ns ± 0% +0.00% CRC32/poly=Koopman/size=15/align=1-32 104ns ± 0% 104ns ± 0% +0.00% CRC32/poly=Koopman/size=40/align=0-32 235ns ± 0% 235ns ± 0% +0.00% CRC32/poly=Koopman/size=40/align=1-32 235ns ± 0% 235ns ± 0% +0.00% CRC32/poly=Koopman/size=512/align=0-32 2.71µs ± 0% 2.71µs ± 0% -0.07% CRC32/poly=Koopman/size=512/align=1-32 2.71µs ± 0% 2.71µs ± 0% -0.04% CRC32/poly=Koopman/size=1kB/align=0-32 5.40µs ± 0% 5.39µs ± 0% -0.06% CRC32/poly=Koopman/size=1kB/align=1-32 5.40µs ± 0% 5.40µs ± 0% +0.02% CRC32/poly=Koopman/size=4kB/align=0-32 21.5µs ± 0% 21.5µs ± 0% -0.16% CRC32/poly=Koopman/size=4kB/align=1-32 21.5µs ± 0% 21.5µs ± 0% -0.05% CRC32/poly=Koopman/size=32kB/align=0-32 172µs ± 0% 172µs ± 0% -0.07% CRC32/poly=Koopman/size=32kB/align=1-32 172µs ± 0% 172µs ± 0% -0.01% name old speed new speed delta CRC32/poly=IEEE/size=15/align=0-32 128MB/s ± 0% 394MB/s ± 0% +207.95% CRC32/poly=IEEE/size=15/align=1-32 128MB/s ± 0% 394MB/s ± 0% +208.09% CRC32/poly=IEEE/size=40/align=0-32 310MB/s ± 0% 979MB/s ± 0% +216.07% CRC32/poly=IEEE/size=40/align=1-32 310MB/s ± 0% 979MB/s ± 0% +216.16% CRC32/poly=IEEE/size=512/align=0-32 618MB/s ± 0% 2074MB/s ± 0% +235.72% CRC32/poly=IEEE/size=512/align=1-32 618MB/s ± 0% 3852MB/s ± 0% +523.55% CRC32/poly=IEEE/size=1kB/align=0-32 646MB/s ± 0% 2225MB/s ± 0% +244.57% CRC32/poly=IEEE/size=1kB/align=1-32 647MB/s ± 0% 2225MB/s ± 0% +243.87% CRC32/poly=IEEE/size=4kB/align=0-32 676MB/s ± 0% 2352MB/s ± 0% +248.02% CRC32/poly=IEEE/size=4kB/align=1-32 672MB/s ± 0% 2352MB/s ± 0% +250.15% CRC32/poly=IEEE/size=32kB/align=0-32 678MB/s ± 0% 2387MB/s ± 0% +252.17% CRC32/poly=IEEE/size=32kB/align=1-32 678MB/s ± 0% 2388MB/s ± 0% +252.11% CRC32/poly=Castagnoli/size=15/align=0-32 129MB/s ± 0% 393MB/s ± 0% +205.51% CRC32/poly=Castagnoli/size=15/align=1-32 129MB/s ± 0% 390MB/s ± 0% +203.41% CRC32/poly=Castagnoli/size=40/align=0-32 314MB/s ± 0% 988MB/s ± 0% +215.04% CRC32/poly=Castagnoli/size=40/align=1-32 314MB/s ± 0% 987MB/s ± 0% +214.68% CRC32/poly=Castagnoli/size=512/align=0-32 618MB/s ± 0% 3860MB/s ± 0% +524.32% CRC32/poly=Castagnoli/size=512/align=1-32 619MB/s ± 0% 3859MB/s ± 0% +523.66% CRC32/poly=Castagnoli/size=1kB/align=0-32 645MB/s ± 0% 4568MB/s ± 0% +608.56% CRC32/poly=Castagnoli/size=1kB/align=1-32 650MB/s ± 0% 4567MB/s ± 0% +602.94% CRC32/poly=Castagnoli/size=4kB/align=0-32 667MB/s ± 0% 5297MB/s ± 0% +693.81% CRC32/poly=Castagnoli/size=4kB/align=1-32 676MB/s ± 0% 5297MB/s ± 0% +684.00% CRC32/poly=Castagnoli/size=32kB/align=0-32 678MB/s ± 0% 5519MB/s ± 0% +713.83% CRC32/poly=Castagnoli/size=32kB/align=1-32 677MB/s ± 0% 5497MB/s ± 0% +712.04% CRC32/poly=Koopman/size=15/align=0-32 143MB/s ± 0% 144MB/s ± 0% +0.27% CRC32/poly=Koopman/size=15/align=1-32 143MB/s ± 0% 144MB/s ± 0% +0.33% CRC32/poly=Koopman/size=40/align=0-32 169MB/s ± 0% 170MB/s ± 0% +0.12% CRC32/poly=Koopman/size=40/align=1-32 170MB/s ± 0% 170MB/s ± 0% +0.08% CRC32/poly=Koopman/size=512/align=0-32 189MB/s ± 0% 189MB/s ± 0% +0.07% CRC32/poly=Koopman/size=512/align=1-32 189MB/s ± 0% 189MB/s ± 0% +0.04% CRC32/poly=Koopman/size=1kB/align=0-32 190MB/s ± 0% 190MB/s ± 0% +0.05% CRC32/poly=Koopman/size=1kB/align=1-32 190MB/s ± 0% 190MB/s ± 0% -0.01% CRC32/poly=Koopman/size=4kB/align=0-32 190MB/s ± 0% 190MB/s ± 0% +0.15% CRC32/poly=Koopman/size=4kB/align=1-32 190MB/s ± 0% 191MB/s ± 0% +0.05% CRC32/poly=Koopman/size=32kB/align=0-32 191MB/s ± 0% 191MB/s ± 0% +0.06% CRC32/poly=Koopman/size=32kB/align=1-32 191MB/s ± 0% 191MB/s ± 0% +0.02% Also fix a bug of arm64 assembler The optimization is mainly contributed by Fangming.Fang <fangming.fang@arm.com> Change-Id: I900678c2e445d7e8ad9e2a9ab3305d649230905f Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/40074 Reviewed-by: Cherry Zhang <cherryyz@google.com> Run-TryBot: Cherry Zhang <cherryyz@google.com> TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
OK, the issue is open on the Go side. Just looking at Go's release schedule, it appears most likely that the earliest this could possibly be addressed is in 1.9, since 1.8.2 looks very much like a bug fix release. That puts us into the end of July. I'll see if there's some stable tip build or RC that we can try before then to validate performance and correctness. Update: "the code has been merged" and will definitely be in 1.9. |
Ben's guess at CRC32 being the culprit is just a guess. Actual profiling should be done too. |
Yeah, it passed now:
But it's still real slow! |
The processors are slow, so this is to be expected. |
Yes, the processors are at 2 Ghz for reference. Also, yay, test passed. |
Closing as I don't think there is anything actionable left to do here. |
As of a8f1b09, on @vielmetti's Packet 2A, 96-core Cavium server running Ubuntu 16.04:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: