I am using Scala, Reactive Mongo 0.10.5 and Mongo 2.6.4 running on Ubuntu. I have tested on a few machine configurations but right now I am working with 15gb of memory, 2 cores and 60gb of SSD storage (AWS)
I have just set up a test mongo instance and have been using it to benchmark a few things, however I am seeing some inconsistency that I can't explain.
I am writing a consistent amount of data using 10 separate threads to a single collection. Each write consists of a document containing an array which contains 1000 elements. Each element is a complex document consisting of several fields and nested fields. I have tested with arrays of 1000, 10000 and 100 and have seen the same behavior with all. Each write is unique (i.e. I never write to the same document twice)
The write speed tends to be around 100-200ms per write with the current hardware I am using. I would like better but that isn't my main issue.
My main issue is that sometimes the write times will spike. When they do, it can take a single write several seconds to complete. They do eventually complete but it takes a while. I have timeouts built into the app doing the writing (10 seconds) and when the spikes happen it will frequently hit that timeout. I have increased the timeout and verified that the write does eventually complete but it can take a long time (30+ seconds).
I have worked with Mongo before using the Mongo Java Driver in Scala and have not noticed this problem. However it is unclear whether the issue is a result of the driver, or my Mongo setup.
I have looked at the logs and while they report when the query is taking longer, they don't actually provide any information about why it is taking longer. I have done the same with profiling and again they report a long query but don't say why it is long.
I have run mongostat while running and it seems that when the writes start taking a long time I notice a similar slow down in mongostat. I.E. mongostat will pause for several seconds before continuing.
The mongo machine itself is bored while this is happening. Load averages are minimal as are CPU and memory usage. It does not appear to be going into swap.
I suspect I just have something configured incorrectly in the Mongo but I haven't been able to find anything that indicates what.
Has anyone seen this behavior before? Is it something in my configuration or perhaps something with the Reactive Mongo driver?
UPDATE:
Using iostat I was able to determine that the normal writes/second is hitting around 1Mb/second. However during the slow periods it spikes to 6-7Mb/second.
I also found the following in the mongo logs.
[DataFileSync] flushing mmaps took 15621ms for 35 files
[DataFileSync] flushing mmaps took 14816ms for 22 files
In at least one case this log statement corresponds exactly with one of the slow downs.
This definitely seems to be a disk flush problem based on these observations.
Does this imply that I am pushing more data than the current Mongo configuration can handle? Or is there some other configuration that can be done to reduce the impact of those flushes?
It appears that in this case the problem may actually have been related to thread locking within the application itself. Once I resolved the issues with thread locking these other issues seemed to go away.
To be honest I don't know why thread locking would result in the observed behavior in Mongo, but if the problem is gone I am not going to complain.
Related
We have a mongodb cluster with 5 PSA replica sets and one sharded collection. About 3,5 TB of data, 2 billion docs on primaries. Average insert rate: 300rps. Average select rate: 1000rps. Mongodb version 4.0.6. Collection has only one extra unique index, all read queries use one of the indexes (no long running queries).
PROBLEM. Sometimes (4 times in a last 2 month) one of the nodes stops responding to the queries with specified read concern or write concern. The same query without read/write concern executes successfully regardless of doing it locally or through mongos. These queries never execute, no errors, no timeouts even when restarting mongos, that initiate the query. No errors in mongod logs, no errors in system logs. Restart of this node fixes the problem. Mongodb sees such broken node as normal, rs.status() shows that everything is ok.
Have no idea how to reproduce this problem, much more intense load testing have no results.
We would appreciate any help and suggestions.
I am using MongoDB (3.0) with a replica set of 3 servers. I experience very slow queries since a week and I have tried to find out what was wrong on my servers.
By using the db.currentOp() command I can see that queries are sometimes blocked on the secondaries when a "replication worker" is running. All the queries are waiting for lock ("waitingForLock" : true) and it seems that the replication worker has taken this lock and is running since several minutes (seems pretty long).
To be more specific about my user case, I have multiple databases in the replica set, all these database containing the same collections but not the same amount of data (I use one database per client).
I use WiredTiger as a storage engine that normally (as the doc claims) do not use global locks. So I was expecting that queries on the specific collection to be slow if this collection is updated, but I was not expecting all the queries to be slow or blocked.
Does anyone experienced the same issue? Is there some limitation with MongoDB when read are performed when processes write in the database?
Furthermore, is there a way to tell MongoDB that I don't care about consistency for read operations (in order to avoid locks)?
Thanks.
Update :
By restarting the servers the problems disappeared. It seems that memory and cpu usage was growing (but was still very low) that this lead to slow replication process which hold a lock and prevent queries execution.
I still don't understand why the we have the problem on this database. Maybe version 3.0.9 has a bug (I will upgrade to 3.0.12). Still it takes one month to the database to be very slow and only a restart of all the servers solve the problem. Our workload is mainly writes (with findAndModify). Does anyone know about a bug in Mongo where intensive write leads to performance decreasing over the time ?
There is a database with 9 million rows, with 3 million distinct entities. Such a database is loaded everyday into MongoDB using perl driver. It runs smoothly on the first load. However from the second, third, etc. the process is really slowed down. It blocks for long times every now and then.
I initially realised that this was because of the automatic flushing to disk every 60 seconds, so I tried setting syncdelay to 0 and I tried the nojournalling option. I have indexed the fields that are used for upsert. Also I have observed that the blocking is inconsistent and not always at the same time for the same line.
I have 17 G ram and enough hard disk space. I am replicating on two servers with one arbiter. I do not have any significant processes running in the background. Is there a solution/explanation for such blocking?
UPDATE: The mongostat tool says in the 'res' column that around 3.6 G is used.
We're using MongoDB 2.2.0 at work. The DB contains about 51GB of data (at the moment) and I'd like to do some analytics on the user data that we've collected so far. Problem is, it's the live machine and we can't afford another slave at the moment. I know MongoDB has a read lock which may affect any writes that happen especially with complex queries. Is there a way to tell MongoDB to treat my (particular) query with the lowest priority?
In MongoDB reads and writes do affect each other. Read locks are shared, but read locks block write locks from being acquired and of course no other reads or writes are happening while a write lock is held. MongoDB operations yield periodically to keep other threads waiting for locks from starving. You can read more about the details of that here.
What does that mean for your use case? Because there is no way to tell MongoDB to access the data without a read lock, nor is there a way to prioritize the requests (at least not yet) whether the reads significantly affect the performance of your writes depends on how much "headroom" you have available while write activity is going on.
One suggestion I can make is when figuring out how to run analytics, rather than scanning the entire data set (i.e. doing an aggregation query over all historical data) try running smaller aggregation queries on short time slices. This will accomplish two things:
reads jobs will be shorter lived and therefore will finish quicker, this will give you a chance to assess what impact the queries have on your "live" performance.
you won't be pulling all old data into RAM at once - by spacing out these analytical queries over time you will minimize the impact it will have on current write performance.
Depending on what it is you can't afford about getting another server - you might consider getting a short lived AWS instance which may be not very powerful but would be available to run a long analytical query against a copy of your data set. Just be careful when making it a copy of your data - doing a full sync off of the production system will place a heavy load on it (more effective way would be to use a recent backup/file snapshot to resume from).
Such operations are best left for slaves of a replica set. For one thing, read locks can be shared to allow many reads at once, but write locks will block reads. And, while you can't prioritize queries, mongodb yields long running read/write queries. Their concurrency docs should help
If you can't afford another server, you can setup a slave on the same machine, provided you have some spare RAM/Disk headroom, and you use the slave lightly/occasionally. You must be careful though, your disk I/O will increase significantly.
All,
I am running CentOS 6.0 with Postgresql 8.4 and can't seem to figure out how to prevent so much disc swap from occurring. I have 12 gigs of RAM and 4 processors and I am doing some simple updates (1 table at a time). I thought for a minute that the inserts happening in parallel from a script I wrong was causing the large memory usage but when I saw the simple update causing it too I basically threw in the towel and decided to ask for help.
I pasted the conf file here. http://pastebin.com/e0jdBu0J
You can see that I set the buffers relatively low and the connection amounts high. The DB service will not start if I set the shared buffers any higher than 64 megs. Anyone have an idea what may be causing this for me?
Thanks,
Adam
If you're going into swap, increasing shared_buffers will make the problem worse; you'll be taking RAM away from the part that's running out and swapping, instead dedicating memory to the database caching. It's worth fixing SHMMAX etc. just on general principle and for later tuning work, but that's not going to help with this problem.
Guessing at the identify of your memory gobbling source is a crapshoot. Far better to look at data from "top -c" and ps to find which processes are using a lot of it. It's possible for a really bad query to consume way more memory than it should. If you see memory use spike up for a PostgreSQL process running something, check the process ID against the information in pg_stat_tables to see what it's doing.
There are a couple of things that can cause this sort of issue that often surprise people. If you are doing a large number of row updates in a single transaction, and there are foreign key checks or triggers involved, that can run out of memory. The queue of things to check in each of those cases is kept in RAM, and can be surprisingly big.
There are two problems with your PostgreSQL settings that might be related. Databases don't actually work very well if you have a lot more active connections than cores in the server; best performance is normally 2 to 3 active clients per core. And all sorts of things go wrong once you've got more than a few hundred connection. There is some connections^2 behavior that gets ugly there performance wise, and there are some memory issues too. If you really need 1250 connections, you should be using a connection pooler such as pgBouncer or pgpool-II.
And effective_io_concurrency = 1000 is way too high for any hardware on the planet. Useful values for that in a small multiple of how many disks you have in the server. I have no idea what happens as far as memory usage goes when you set it that high, but it's not been tested very well at that range. Normal settings more like 1 to 25. The parameters outlined at Tuning Your PostgreSQL Server are much more important than it is; the concurrency value only impacts one particular type of table scan.
Centos 6 seems to have a very conservative shmmax as a default
Set your shared buffers to that recommended by postgres tuning resources
see for explanation and how to set.
To experiment you can (as root) use sysctl -w kernel.shmmax = n
where n is the value that the startup error message that postgres is trying to allocate on startup. When you identify the value you wish to use permanently then set that in /etc/sysctl.conf