Currently, rendering a view is capable of handling multiple ops for
the same fingerprint efficiently. However, this capability requires a
lot of complexity in the code, which we are not using at all because
the way we assemble a viewRequest will never have more than one
operation per fingerprint.
This commit weeds out the said capability, along with all the code
needed for it. It is still possible to have more than one operation
for the same fingerprint, it will just be handled in a less efficient
way (as proven by the unit tests).
As a result, scanjob.go could be removed entirely.
This commit also contains a few related refactorings and removals of
dead code in operation.go, view,go, and freelist.go. Also, the
docstrings received some love.
Change-Id: I032b976e0880151c3f3fdb3234fb65e484f0e2e5
Problem description:
====================
If a rule evaluation referencing a metric/timeseries M happens at a time
when M doesn't have a memory timeseries yet, looking up the fingerprint
for M (via TieredStorage.GetMetricForFingerprint()) will create a new
Metric object for M which gets both: a) attached to a new empty memory
timeseries (so we don't have to ask disk for the Metric's fingerprint
next time), and b) returned to the rule evaluation layer. However, the
rule evaluation layer replaces the name label (and possibly other
labels) of the metric with the name of the recorded rule. Since both
the rule evaluator and the memory storage share a reference to the same
Metric object, the original memory timeseries will now also be
incorrectly renamed.
Fix:
====
Instead of storing a reference to a shared metric object, take a copy of
the object when creating an empty memory timeseries for caching
purposes.
Change-Id: I9f2172696c16c10b377e6708553a46ef29390f1e
So far we've been using Go's native time.Time for anything related to sample
timestamps. Since the range of time.Time is much bigger than what we need, this
has created two problems:
- there could be time.Time values which were out of the range/precision of the
time type that we persist to disk, therefore causing incorrectly ordered keys.
One bug caused by this was:
https://github.com/prometheus/prometheus/issues/367
It would be good to use a timestamp type that's more closely aligned with
what the underlying storage supports.
- sizeof(time.Time) is 192, while Prometheus should be ok with a single 64-bit
Unix timestamp (possibly even a 32-bit one). Since we store samples in large
numbers, this seriously affects memory usage. Furthermore, copying/working
with the data will be faster if it's smaller.
*MEMORY USAGE RESULTS*
Initial memory usage comparisons for a running Prometheus with 1 timeseries and
100,000 samples show roughly a 13% decrease in total (VIRT) memory usage. In my
tests, this advantage for some reason decreased a bit the more samples the
timeseries had (to 5-7% for millions of samples). This I can't fully explain,
but perhaps garbage collection issues were involved.
*WHEN TO USE THE NEW TIMESTAMP TYPE*
The new clientmodel.Timestamp type should be used whenever time
calculations are either directly or indirectly related to sample
timestamps.
For example:
- the timestamp of a sample itself
- all kinds of watermarks
- anything that may become or is compared to a sample timestamp (like the timestamp
passed into Target.Scrape()).
When to still use time.Time:
- for measuring durations/times not related to sample timestamps, like duration
telemetry exporting, timers that indicate how frequently to execute some
action, etc.
*NOTE ON OPERATOR OPTIMIZATION TESTS*
We don't use operator optimization code anymore, but it still lives in
the code as dead code. It still has tests, but I couldn't get all of them to
pass with the new timestamp format. I commented out the failing cases for now,
but we should probably remove the dead code soon. I just didn't want to do that
in the same change as this.
Change-Id: I821787414b0debe85c9fffaeb57abd453727af0f
This adds timers around several query-relevant code blocks. For now, the
query timer stats are only logged for queries initiated through the UI.
In other cases (rule evaluations), the stats are simply thrown away.
My hope is that this helps us understand where queries spend time,
especially in cases where they sometimes hang for unusual amounts of
time.
This does two things:
1) Make TieredStorage.AppendSamples() write directly to memory instead of
buffering to a channel first. This is needed in cases where a rule might
immediately need the data generated by a previous rule.
2) Replace the single storage mutex by two new ones:
- memoryMutex - needs to be locked at any time that two concurrent
goroutines could be accessing (via read or write) the
TieredStorage memoryArena.
- memoryDeleteMutex - used to prevent any deletion of samples from
memoryArena as long as renderView is running and
assembling data from it.
The LevelDB disk storage does not need to be protected by a mutex when
rendering a view since renderView works off a LevelDB snapshot.
The rationale against adding memoryMutex directly to the memory storage: taking
a mutex does come with a small inherent time cost, and taking it is only
required in few places. In fact, no locking is required for the memory storage
instance which is part of a view (and not the TieredStorage).
This commit extracts the model.Values truncation behavior into the actual
tiered storage, which uses it and behaves in a peculiar way—notably the
retention of previous elements if the chunk were to ever go empty. This is
done to enable interpolation between sparse sample values in the evaluation
cycle. Nothing necessarily new here—just an extraction.
Now, the model.Values TruncateBefore functionality would do what a user
would expect without any surprises, which is required for the
DeletionProcessor, which may decide to split a large chunk in two if it
determines that the chunk contains the cut-off time.
This commit drops the Storage interface and just replaces it with a
publicized TieredStorage type. Storage had been anticipated to be
used as a wrapper for testability but just was not used due to
practicality. Merely overengineered. My bad. Anyway, we will
eventually instantiate the TieredStorage dependencies in main.go and
pass them in for more intelligent lifecycle management.
These changes will pave the way for managing the curators without
Law of Demeter violations.
