Skip to content
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

feat(search): Support mutex to guarantee index update thread safety #2491

Draft
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: unstable
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

Beihao-Zhou
Copy link
Member

Closes #2489

Summary

This PR fixes the concurrency issue mentioned in #2481, however, this is now pretty slow for uploading operation and bounded by the computational resources from my local laptop. I'll set up the same instance capacity as mentioned in the post and benchmark.

@@ -52,21 +53,28 @@ struct FieldInfo {

struct IndexInfo {
using FieldMap = std::map<std::string, FieldInfo>;
using MutexMap = std::map<std::string, std::mutex>;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Maybe we can put mutexes into IndexUpdaters instead of IndexInfos?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sure, this makes more sense <3

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

While trying to move the exact same piece of code into IndexUpdaters, I encountered the following errors:

‘constexpr std::pair<_T1, _T2>::pair(const std::pair<_T1, _T2>&) [with _T1 = const std::__cxx11::basic_string<char>; _T2 = std::mutex]’ is implicitly deleted because the default definition would be ill-formed:
  314 |       constexpr pair(const pair&) = default;    ///< Copy constructor

I suspect that this is caused by IndexUpdaters are usually created on stacks, which causes std::map doing some underlying copies and deletions, while IndexInfos are allocated on heap so doesn't have the issue.
I tried to wrap std::mutex into a unique_ptr but the compiler will report the same error.

I'm not quite sure what I can do at this point, may leave it as it is, and try to benchmark first. But feel free to let me know if you think there is anything I missed, or any workaround you can think of. @PragmaTwice <3

@Beihao-Zhou
Copy link
Member Author

Tried the benchmark framework today, which took more than one hour to upload, but didn't even finish. I thought there was something wrong and killed the process, but after double-checking the redis benchmark here, seems like it also took redis 1.5 hours.
Will try it again these two days, but one call-out is that kvrocks definitely doesn't fully utilize the compute resources.

Screen Shot 2024-08-18 at 5 51 38 PM

@jonathanc-n
Copy link
Contributor

@Beihao-Zhou Do you know if theres a place where you can configure your compute for kvrocks?

@Beihao-Zhou
Copy link
Member Author

@Beihao-Zhou Do you know if theres a place where you can configure your compute for kvrocks?

Thanks a lot for pointing this out! I thought I was bottlenecked by lock itself so didn't try different config options, will look into them!

@Beihao-Zhou
Copy link
Member Author

Apology for the late update! Was busy with relocation for the past two weeks.

Quick Update:
I tried to benchmark the default dataset upload operation, but it took around 4.5 hours and didn't even finish...
I can't quite estimate how long it will take, but notice that only one thread will use 100% CPU during the majority time. I'm not quite sure if this is because we used mutex here.
I'll try to tune CPU usage in the config and run the benchmark again these two days; however, let me know if you have any better ideas! @PragmaTwice

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Introduce Mutex Map in IndexInfo to Ensure Thread Safety During Index Construction
3 participants