We are trying to deploy an apache Flink job on a K8s Cluster, but we are noticing an odd behavior, when we start our job, the task manager memory starts with the amount assigned, in our case is 3 GB.
taskmanager.memory.process.size: 3g
eventually, the memory starts decreasing until it reaches about 160 MB, at that point, it recovers a little memory so it doesn't reach its end.
that very low memory often causes that the job is terminated due to task manager heartbeat exception even when trying to watch the logs on Flink dashboard or doing the job's process.
Why is it going so low on memory? we expected to have that behavior but in the range of GB because we assigned those 3Gb to the task manager even if we change our task manager memory size we have the same behavior.
Our Flink conf looks like this:
flink-conf.yaml: |+
taskmanager.numberOfTaskSlots: 1
blob.server.port: 6124
taskmanager.rpc.port: 6122
taskmanager.memory.process.size: 3g
metrics.reporters: prom
metrics.reporter.prom.class: org.apache.flink.metrics.prometheus.PrometheusReporter
metrics.reporter.prom.port: 9999
metrics.system-resource: true
metrics.system-resource-probing-interval: 5000
jobmanager.rpc.address: flink-jobmanager
jobmanager.rpc.port: 6123
is there a recommended configuration on K8s for memory or something that we are missing on our flink-conf.yml?
Thanks.
Your configuration looks fine. It's most likely an issue with your code and some kind of memory leak. This is a very good answer describing what may be the problem.
You can try setting a limit on the JVM heap with taskmanager.memory.task.heap.size that you give the JVM some extra room to do GC, etc. But in the end, if you are allocating something that is not being referenced you will run into the situation.
Presumably, you are using your memory to store your state in which case you can also try RockDB as a state backend in case you are storing large objects.
What are your requests/limits in you deployment templates? If there are no specified request sizes you may be seeing your cluster resources get eaten.
Related
Thank you for reading this SO question, it may seem long, but I'll try to get as most information as possible in it to help to get the answer.
Summary
We are currently experiencing a scheduling issue with our Flink cluster.
The symptoms are that some/most/all (it depends, the symptoms are not always the same) of our tasks are shown as SCHEDULED but fail after a timeout. The jobs are then shown as RUNNING.
The failing exception is the following one:
Caused by: java.util.concurrent.CompletionException: org.apache.flink.runtime.jobmanager.scheduler.NoResourceAvailableException: Slot request bulk is not fulfillable! Could not allocate the required slot within slot request timeout
After analysis, we assume (we cannot prove it, as there are not that much logs for that part of the code) that the failure is due to a deadlock/race condition that is happening when several jobs are being submitted at the same time to the Flink cluster, even though we have enough slots available in the cluster.
We actually have the error with 52 available task slots, and have 12 jobs that are not scheduled.
Additional information
Flink version: 1.13.1 commit a7f3192
Flink cluster in session mode
2 Job managers using k8s HA mode (resource requests: 2 CPU, 4Gb Ram, limits sets on memory to 4Gb)
50 task managers with 2 slots each (resource requests: 2 CPUs, 2GB Ram. No limits set).
Our Flink cluster is shut down every night, and restarted every morning. The error seems to occur when a lot of jobs needs to be scheduled. The jobs are configured to restore their state, and we do not see any issues for jobs that are being scheduled and run correctly, it seems to really be related to a scheduling issue.
Questions
May it be that the issue described in FLINK-23409 is actually the same, but occurs only when there is a race condition when scheduling several jobs?
Is there any way to increase logging in the scheduler to debug this issue?
Is it a known issue? If yes, is there any workaround/solution to resolve it?
P.S: a while ago, I asked more or less the same question on the ML, but dropped it, I'm sorry if this is considered as cross-asking, it's not intended t. We are just opening a new thread as we have more information and the issue re-occur.
I am running load test of 24 hours using Jmeter in Azure Kubernetes service. I am using Throughput shaping timer in my jmx file. No listener is added as part of jmx file.
My test stopped abruptly after 6 or 7 hrs.
jmeter-server.log file under Jmeter slave pod is giving warning --> WARN k.a.j.t.VariableThroughputTimer: No free threads left in worker pool.
Below is snapshot from jmeter-server.log file.
Using Jmeter version - 5.2.1 and Kubernetes version - 1.19.6
I checked, Jmeter pods for master and slaves are continously running(no restart happened) in AKS.
I provided 2GB memory to Jmeter slave pod still load test is stopped abruptly.
I am using log analytics workspace for logging. Checked ContainerLog table not getting error.
Snapshot of JMX file.
Using following elements -> Thread Group, Throughput Controller, Http request Sampler and Throughput Shaping Timer
Please suggest for same.
It looks like your Schedule Feedback Function configuration is wrong in its last parameter
The warning means that the Throughput Shaping Timer attempts to increase the number of threads to reach/maintain the desired concurrency but it doesn't have enough threads in order to do this.
So either increase this Spare threads ration to be closer to 1 if you're using a float value for percentage or increment the absolute value in order to match the number of threads.
Quote from documentation:
Example function call: ${__tstFeedback(tst-name,1,100,10)} , where "tst-name" is name of Throughput Shaping Timer to integrate with, 1 and 100 are starting threads and max allowed threads, 10 is how many spare threads to keep in thread pool. If spare threads parameter is a float value <1, then it is interpreted as a ratio relative to the current estimate of threads needed. If above 1, spare threads is interpreted as an absolute count.
More information: Using JMeter’s Throughput Shaping Timer Plugin
However it doesn't explain the premature termination of the test so ensure that there are no errors in jmeter/k8s logs, one of the possible reasons is that JMeter process is being terminated by OOMKiller
According to both of these Link1 and Link2, my Airflow DAG run is returning the error INFO - Task exited with return code -9 due to an out-of-memory issue. My DAG run has 10 tasks/operators, and each task simply:
makes a query to get one of my BigQuery tables, and
writes the results to a collection in my Mongo database.
The size of the 10 BigQuery tables range from 1MB to 400MB, and the total size of all 10 tables is ~1GB. My docker container has default 2GB of memory and I've increased this to 4GB, however I am still receiving this error from a few of the tasks. I am confused about this, as 4GB should be plenty of memory for this. I am also concerned because, in the future, these tables may become larger (a single table query could be 1-2GB), and I'd like to avoid these return code -9 errors at that time.
I'm not quite sure how to handle this issue, since the point of the DAG is to transfer data from BigQuery to Mongo daily, and the queries / data in-memory for the DAG's tasks is necessarily fairly large then, based on the size of the tables.
As you said, the error message you get corresponds to an out of memory issue.
Referring to the official documentation:
DAG execution is RAM limited. Each task execution starts with two
Airflow processes: task execution and monitoring. Currently, each node
can take up to 6 concurrent tasks. More memory can be consumed,
depending on the size of the DAG.
High memory pressure in any of the GKE nodes will lead the Kubernetes scheduler to evict pods from nodes in an attempt to relieve that pressure. While many different Airflow components are running within GKE, most don't tend to use much memory, so the case that happens most frequently is that a user uploaded a resource-intensive DAG. The Airflow workers run those DAGs, run out of resources, and then get evicted.
You can check it with following steps:
In the Cloud Console, navigate to Kubernetes Engine -> Workloads
Click on airflow-worker, and look under Managed pods
If there are pods that show Evicted, click each evicted pod and look for the The node was low on resource: memory message at the top of the window.
What are the possible ways to fix OOM issue?
Create a new Cloud Composer environment with a larger machine type than the current machine type.
Ensure that the tasks in the DAG are idempotent, which means that the result of running the same DAG run multiple times should be the same as the result of running it once.
Configure task retries by setting the number of retries on the task - this way when your task gets -9'ed by the scheduler it will go to up_for_retry instead of failed
Additionally you can check the behavior of CPU:
In the Cloud Console, navigate to Kubernetes Engine -> Clusters
Locate Node Pools at the bottom of the page, and expand the default-pool section
Click the link listed under Instance groups
Switch to the Monitoring tab, where you can find CPU utilization
Ideally, the GCE instances shouldn't be running over 70% CPU at all times, or the Composer environment may become unstable during resource usage.
I hope you find the above pieces of information useful.
I am going to chunk the data so that less is loaded into any 1 task at any given time. I'm not sure yet whether I will need to use GCS/S3 for intermediary storage.
I have deployed my dockerized micro services in AWS server using Elastic Beanstalk which is written using Akka-HTTP(https://github.com/theiterators/akka-http-microservice) and Scala.
I have allocated 512mb memory size for each docker and performance problems. I have noticed that the CPU usage increased when server getting more number of requests(like 20%, 23%, 45%...) & depends on load, then it automatically came down to the normal state (0.88%). But Memory usage keeps on increasing for every request and it failed to release unused memory even after CPU usage came to the normal stage and it reached 100% and docker killed by itself and restarted again.
I have also enabled auto scaling feature in EB to handle a huge number of requests. So it created another duplicate instance only after CPU usage of the running instance is reached its maximum.
How can I setup auto-scaling to create another instance once memory usage is reached its maximum limit(i.e 500mb out of 512mb)?
Please provide us a solution/way to resolve these problems as soon as possible as it is a very critical problem for us?
CloudWatch doesn't natively report memory statistics. But there are some scripts that Amazon provides (usually just referred to as the "CloudWatch Monitoring Scripts for Linux) that will get the statistics into CloudWatch so you can use those metrics to build a scaling policy.
The Elastic Beanstalk documentation provides some information on installing the scripts on the Linux platform at http://docs.aws.amazon.com/elasticbeanstalk/latest/dg/customize-containers-cw.html.
However, this will come with another caveat in that you cannot use the native Docker deployment JSON as it won't pick up the .ebextensions folder (see Where to put ebextensions config in AWS Elastic Beanstalk Docker deploy with dockerrun source bundle?). The solution here would be to create a zip of your application that includes the JSON file and .ebextensions folder and use that as the deployment artifact.
There is also one thing I am unclear on and that is if these metrics will be available to choose from under the Configuration -> Scaling section of the application. You may need to create another .ebextensions config file to set the custom metric such as:
option_settings:
aws:elasticbeanstalk:customoption:
BreachDuration: 3
LowerBreachScaleIncrement: -1
MeasureName: MemoryUtilization
Period: 60
Statistic: Average
Threshold: 90
UpperBreachScaleIncrement: 2
Now, even if this works, if the application will not lower its memory usage after scaling and load goes down then the scaling policy would just continue to trigger and reach max instances eventually.
I'd first see if you can get some garbage collection statistics for the JVM and maybe tune the JVM to do garbage collection more often to help bring memory down faster after application load goes down.
Does varnish keep a crash / restart log?
I am currently monitoring a varnish server and it seems to restart every week or so, when CPU usage reaches about 100% (load gets a bit high - about 6~7 on a 2 cores machine) and IO wait takes an avg of 45% of CPU time.
Am I missing any configuration or predefined behavior? Does it mean that I have a bottleneck in my hardware causing varnish failures?
Thanks!
When the child dies you should see a message in syslog. It will say something like Child exited.... Varnish is good about keeping track of the child, so when it does crash it will be immediately restarted and it should log it.
Load of 6-7 seems high. If you are using file backed storage I suggest switching to malloc. If you need more cache space, get a box with more memory. Use the nuking behavior as your guide (varnishstat -1 | grep nuke). If the value there reported by varnish is 0 your cache size is sufficient.