criminosis
criminosis
Explore posts from servers
JJanusGraph
Created by criminosis on 7/10/2024 in #questions
MergeV "get or create" performance asymmetry
Reran my trial with both set to chunk sizes of 10 of the 10k batch (both still had 10 parallel connections allowed). So this reduced the MergeV chunk (what it'd inject into the traversal) down from 200 to 10, but figured that'd make it more comparable on the lookup side. MergeV got way worse 🤔
Trial 0 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 7834 ms MergeV: 7464 ms
MergeV redo: 11842 ms
Reference: 2377 ms MergeV: 11526 ms (All read, dataset swap)

Trial 1 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 7747 ms MergeV: 8399 ms
test mergev_demo has been running for over 60 seconds
MergeV redo: 11411 ms
Reference: 2247 ms MergeV: 12502 ms (All read, dataset swap)

Trial 2 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 7477 ms MergeV: 7834 ms
MergeV redo: 11205 ms
Reference: 2211 ms MergeV: 13655 ms (All read, dataset swap)

Trial 3 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 8258 ms MergeV: 8440 ms
MergeV redo: 11932 ms
Reference: 2154 ms MergeV: 12316 ms (All read, dataset swap)

Trial 4 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 9069 ms MergeV: 8718 ms
MergeV redo: 18618 ms
Reference: 3375 ms MergeV: 25823 ms (All read, dataset swap)

Trial 5 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 14659 ms MergeV: 13939 ms
MergeV redo: 21259 ms
Reference: 4586 ms MergeV: 23869 ms (All read, dataset swap)

Trial 6 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 17766 ms MergeV: 19030 ms
MergeV redo: 22648 ms
Reference: 3790 ms MergeV: 20051 ms (All read, dataset swap)

Trial 7 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 13271 ms MergeV: 14976 ms
MergeV redo: 21850 ms
Reference: 3126 ms MergeV: 23877 ms (All read, dataset swap)

Trial 8 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 14844 ms MergeV: 16161 ms
MergeV redo: 26621 ms
Reference: 3400 ms MergeV: 23748 ms (All read, dataset swap)

Trial 9 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 18169 ms MergeV: 17160 ms
MergeV redo: 29828 ms
Reference: 4315 ms MergeV: 26917 ms (All read, dataset swap)
Trial 0 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 7834 ms MergeV: 7464 ms
MergeV redo: 11842 ms
Reference: 2377 ms MergeV: 11526 ms (All read, dataset swap)

Trial 1 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 7747 ms MergeV: 8399 ms
test mergev_demo has been running for over 60 seconds
MergeV redo: 11411 ms
Reference: 2247 ms MergeV: 12502 ms (All read, dataset swap)

Trial 2 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 7477 ms MergeV: 7834 ms
MergeV redo: 11205 ms
Reference: 2211 ms MergeV: 13655 ms (All read, dataset swap)

Trial 3 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 8258 ms MergeV: 8440 ms
MergeV redo: 11932 ms
Reference: 2154 ms MergeV: 12316 ms (All read, dataset swap)

Trial 4 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 9069 ms MergeV: 8718 ms
MergeV redo: 18618 ms
Reference: 3375 ms MergeV: 25823 ms (All read, dataset swap)

Trial 5 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 14659 ms MergeV: 13939 ms
MergeV redo: 21259 ms
Reference: 4586 ms MergeV: 23869 ms (All read, dataset swap)

Trial 6 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 17766 ms MergeV: 19030 ms
MergeV redo: 22648 ms
Reference: 3790 ms MergeV: 20051 ms (All read, dataset swap)

Trial 7 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 13271 ms MergeV: 14976 ms
MergeV redo: 21850 ms
Reference: 3126 ms MergeV: 23877 ms (All read, dataset swap)

Trial 8 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 14844 ms MergeV: 16161 ms
MergeV redo: 26621 ms
Reference: 3400 ms MergeV: 23748 ms (All read, dataset swap)

Trial 9 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 18169 ms MergeV: 17160 ms
MergeV redo: 29828 ms
Reference: 4315 ms MergeV: 26917 ms (All read, dataset swap)
6 replies
JJanusGraph
Created by criminosis on 7/10/2024 in #questions
MergeV "get or create" performance asymmetry
I guess technically mergeV is having to lookup 200 vertices per network call whereas Reference's chunk size is only 10, but figured I'd post the question in case this seemed weird to any JG core devs
6 replies
JJanusGraph
Created by criminosis on 7/10/2024 in #questions
MergeV "get or create" performance asymmetry
But then figured I should try the "get" side of the "get or create" and I was rather surprised that mergeV seemed to be significantly slower than the "traditional" way of doing it: "MergeV redo" is the writing the same vertices again from the inital MergeV trial. The "(All read, dataset swap)" line is running the Reference and MergeV logic again, but with the other's dataset.
Trial 0 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 11752 ms MergeV: 3469 ms
MergeV redo: 8512 ms
Reference: 2822 ms MergeV: 7752 ms (All read, dataset swap)

Trial 1 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 12001 ms MergeV: 3729 ms
MergeV redo: 7313 ms
test mergev_demo has been running for over 60 seconds
Reference: 3190 ms MergeV: 7854 ms (All read, dataset swap)

Trial 2 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 13198 ms MergeV: 3683 ms
MergeV redo: 9451 ms
Reference: 2212 ms MergeV: 7445 ms (All read, dataset swap)

Trial 3 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 13053 ms MergeV: 3110 ms
MergeV redo: 8635 ms
Reference: 2295 ms MergeV: 6918 ms (All read, dataset swap)

Trial 4 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 14799 ms MergeV: 3492 ms
MergeV redo: 7777 ms
Reference: 2746 ms MergeV: 7858 ms (All read, dataset swap)

Trial 5 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 13755 ms MergeV: 3248 ms
MergeV redo: 8447 ms
Reference: 3448 ms MergeV: 8789 ms (All read, dataset swap)

Trial 6 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 16477 ms MergeV: 3572 ms
MergeV redo: 7834 ms
Reference: 3196 ms MergeV: 8690 ms (All read, dataset swap)

Trial 7 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 19804 ms MergeV: 3869 ms
MergeV redo: 9646 ms
Reference: 3727 ms MergeV: 9107 ms (All read, dataset swap)

Trial 8 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 16757 ms MergeV: 3389 ms
MergeV redo: 7432 ms
Reference: 2422 ms MergeV: 7552 ms (All read, dataset swap)

Trial 9 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 19879 ms MergeV: 4459 ms
MergeV redo: 8559 ms
Reference: 2877 ms MergeV: 8536 ms (All read, dataset swap)
Trial 0 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 11752 ms MergeV: 3469 ms
MergeV redo: 8512 ms
Reference: 2822 ms MergeV: 7752 ms (All read, dataset swap)

Trial 1 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 12001 ms MergeV: 3729 ms
MergeV redo: 7313 ms
test mergev_demo has been running for over 60 seconds
Reference: 3190 ms MergeV: 7854 ms (All read, dataset swap)

Trial 2 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 13198 ms MergeV: 3683 ms
MergeV redo: 9451 ms
Reference: 2212 ms MergeV: 7445 ms (All read, dataset swap)

Trial 3 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 13053 ms MergeV: 3110 ms
MergeV redo: 8635 ms
Reference: 2295 ms MergeV: 6918 ms (All read, dataset swap)

Trial 4 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 14799 ms MergeV: 3492 ms
MergeV redo: 7777 ms
Reference: 2746 ms MergeV: 7858 ms (All read, dataset swap)

Trial 5 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 13755 ms MergeV: 3248 ms
MergeV redo: 8447 ms
Reference: 3448 ms MergeV: 8789 ms (All read, dataset swap)

Trial 6 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 16477 ms MergeV: 3572 ms
MergeV redo: 7834 ms
Reference: 3196 ms MergeV: 8690 ms (All read, dataset swap)

Trial 7 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 19804 ms MergeV: 3869 ms
MergeV redo: 9646 ms
Reference: 3727 ms MergeV: 9107 ms (All read, dataset swap)

Trial 8 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 16757 ms MergeV: 3389 ms
MergeV redo: 7432 ms
Reference: 2422 ms MergeV: 7552 ms (All read, dataset swap)

Trial 9 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 19879 ms MergeV: 4459 ms
MergeV redo: 8559 ms
Reference: 2877 ms MergeV: 8536 ms (All read, dataset swap)
6 replies
JJanusGraph
Created by criminosis on 7/10/2024 in #questions
MergeV "get or create" performance asymmetry
Doing my trials (Cassandra & ES running locally via docker compose, also running JG locally in said docker compose enviornment) I was seeing 2-4x improvement of writes to the graph when the vertices were all novel ids (Reference & MergeV trials would generate distinct datasets to write for each trial):
Trial 0 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 13585 ms MergeV: 3357 ms

Trial 1 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 11897 ms MergeV: 3765 ms

Trial 2 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 9835 ms MergeV: 3703 ms

Trial 3 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 10971 ms MergeV: 3651 ms

Trial 4 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 9503 ms MergeV: 3519 ms

Trial 5 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 9728 ms MergeV: 3477 ms

Trial 6 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 8867 ms MergeV: 3779 ms

Trial 7 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 8575 ms MergeV: 3666 ms

Trial 8 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 8773 ms MergeV: 3551 ms

Trial 9 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 9755 ms MergeV: 3524 ms
Trial 0 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 13585 ms MergeV: 3357 ms

Trial 1 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 11897 ms MergeV: 3765 ms

Trial 2 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 9835 ms MergeV: 3703 ms

Trial 3 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 10971 ms MergeV: 3651 ms

Trial 4 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 9503 ms MergeV: 3519 ms

Trial 5 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 9728 ms MergeV: 3477 ms

Trial 6 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 8867 ms MergeV: 3779 ms

Trial 7 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 8575 ms MergeV: 3666 ms

Trial 8 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 8773 ms MergeV: 3551 ms

Trial 9 w/ 10000 vertices
Reference: 9755 ms MergeV: 3524 ms
6 replies
JJanusGraph
Created by criminosis on 5/24/2024 in #questions
Comma Separated Config Options Values Via Environment Variable?
Looking at my commit message for the change it looks like I described it as so:
Kill JG if the graph fails to open instead of idly be hosting no graphs
So it seems I'm correctly remembering the symptom, but having defined steps for reproduction would be beneficial for the feature request
33 replies
JJanusGraph
Created by criminosis on 5/24/2024 in #questions
Comma Separated Config Options Values Via Environment Variable?
I'll have to reproduce the scenario before I create the feature request. TBH this was a change I made over a year ago so the details have fallen into the memory aether if I'm being honest 😅 We also sharpened other k8s infra with liveliness probes since then so we may have addressed this issue, at least for ourselves, via other means.
33 replies
JJanusGraph
Created by criminosis on 5/24/2024 in #questions
Comma Separated Config Options Values Via Environment Variable?
Vs what I wanted was the container to die in that case. Which the checked graph manager would do.
33 replies
JJanusGraph
Created by criminosis on 5/24/2024 in #questions
Comma Separated Config Options Values Via Environment Variable?
The storage timescript does watch for cassandra to be up, but IIRC it would just timeout but not kill the container? So the graph would attempt to open, fail, and then JG would just hang out without any graphs being opened.
33 replies
JJanusGraph
Created by criminosis on 5/24/2024 in #questions
Comma Separated Config Options Values Via Environment Variable?
Yeah, I ended up doing something similar with our hold HBase system. It feels fairly common place to rebuild these tools 😅
33 replies
JJanusGraph
Created by criminosis on 5/24/2024 in #questions
Comma Separated Config Options Values Via Environment Variable?
The reason I did it wasn't for schema
33 replies
JJanusGraph
Created by criminosis on 5/24/2024 in #questions
Comma Separated Config Options Values Via Environment Variable?
But now that I'm retracing through the steps, I automated this a long time ago so it's gotten a little dusty in my memory, I may have conflated an issue here
33 replies
JJanusGraph
Created by criminosis on 5/24/2024 in #questions
Comma Separated Config Options Values Via Environment Variable?
Well, to be clear I'm not doing it in the containers that are running JG for purposes of hosting, it's done in a secondary loader container that runs just once at the deployment start
33 replies
JJanusGraph
Created by criminosis on 5/24/2024 in #questions
Comma Separated Config Options Values Via Environment Variable?
Loosely inspired by liquibase
33 replies
JJanusGraph
Created by criminosis on 5/24/2024 in #questions
Comma Separated Config Options Values Via Environment Variable?
Each script is versioned and writes a "completed version X" indicator into the graph
33 replies
JJanusGraph
Created by criminosis on 5/24/2024 in #questions
Comma Separated Config Options Values Via Environment Variable?
The scripts check if the schema was already loaded and skips doing it again.
33 replies
JJanusGraph
Created by criminosis on 5/24/2024 in #questions
Comma Separated Config Options Values Via Environment Variable?
Of course, no argument there. But it's what drew me to the checked graph manager, albeit at the cost of unwittingly opting out of the JG add-ons with its graph manager. Hence asking if there would be appetite for a PR that'd add a "Checked"JanusGraphManager
33 replies
JJanusGraph
Created by criminosis on 5/24/2024 in #questions
Comma Separated Config Options Values Via Environment Variable?
I was also wanting the container to die if it failed to successfully apply the schema I had defined for it to load up on start.
33 replies
JJanusGraph
Created by criminosis on 5/24/2024 in #questions
Comma Separated Config Options Values Via Environment Variable?
Okay, after quite a journey of vetting the parsing behavior from environment variable into property files, into the various Confirmation implementations into ConfigOptions, etc etc I've found where this has gone sideways....and like the worst of these types of situations looks like this one was self inflicted 🤦‍♂️ . A long long long time ago when I was starting on working with JanusGraph I was tired of JanusGraph deployments that silently failed and leaving my container up but dead inside the container, for reasons that weren't its fault (started up before Cassandra was ready timing out its storage wait time, etc). Trying to find solutions for that I stumbled upon the Tinkerpop CheckGraphManager (https://github.com/apache/tinkerpop/blob/master/gremlin-server/src/main/java/org/apache/tinkerpop/gremlin/server/util/CheckedGraphManager.java) that would automatically terminate the process if the specified graphs did not successfully open. So I switched to that graph manager like so: ENV gremlinserver.graphManager=org.apache.tinkerpop.gremlin.server.util.CheckedGraphManager But this has the unintended consequence of removing the configuration parsing handling that is afforded by JanusGraphManager (https://github.com/JanusGraph/janusgraph/blob/487e10ca276678862fd8fb369d6d17188703ba67/janusgraph-core/src/main/java/org/janusgraph/graphdb/management/JanusGraphManager.java#L73), like handling String arrays config options 🤦‍♂️ . Would there be appetite for like a CheckJanusGraphManager that would extend JanusGraphManager and overlay a duplication of logic that the Tinkerpop CheckGraphManager performs? I could attempt to put that up. It's been handled in my k8s environment so the container doesn't just hang around as a faster version of waiting for probes to fail.
33 replies
JJanusGraph
Created by criminosis on 5/24/2024 in #questions
Comma Separated Config Options Values Via Environment Variable?
But Docker is provided as an official way to deploy JanusGraph, so shouldn't we be able to do this through Docker?
33 replies
JJanusGraph
Created by criminosis on 5/24/2024 in #questions
Comma Separated Config Options Values Via Environment Variable?
33 replies