|
On 10/11/2018 12:57 AM, William Brown
wrote:
On Wed, 2018-10-10 at 16:26 +0200, thierry bordaz wrote:Hi William, Thanks for starting this discussion. Your email raise several aspects (How, for whom,..) and I think a way to start would be to write down what we want. A need is from a given workload to determine where we are spending time as a way to determine where to invest. An other need is to collect metrics at operation level.Aren't these very similar? The time we invest is generally on improving a plugin or a small part of an operation, to make the operation as a whole faster. It could be the used tools that are similar but the difference is about expected results. For example I was just discussing with a user who reported: [24/Oct/2018:12:10:55.012908141 -0800] conn=2400 op=1 MODRDN dn="<DN_one>" newsuperior="(null)" So here the expected result is not to improve performance but having a diagnostic method/tool to know what is going on in production compare to tests. So if we can report on an individual operation, we can write a tool similar to log-conv.pl, but for performance metrics that displays trends of operations that are not performaning well, then we can find examples of operations and why.From the how perspective, we can rely on external tools (stap+scripts), or internal tool (like the plugin you described+scripts). Of course we can also do some enhancements inside DS (like adding probes) to help external tools. I have no strong opinion if an approach is better than the other but I think it also depends what you want to perform.I think that it would be great if the tools we use internal to the team, were accessible outside to admins of ds. That way when we get reports for performance concerns, we have a standardised way of looking at this. It's going to mean our workflow is the same between internal development and profiling, as for external reports, and it will force us to have all the information we need in that one place. I think as a coarse first metric internal event timings is probably want we want first. After that we can continue to extend from there? As for the how, perhaps we can put something on the Operation struct for appending and logging events and turning those into metrics? As mentioned you could use stap too with defined points for tracing, but that limits us to linux only?best regards thierry On 10/08/2018 12:37 PM, William Brown wrote:Hi there, In a ticket Thierry and I mentioned that we should have a quick discussion about ideas for profiling and what we want it to look like and what we need. I think it’s important we improve our observation into the server so that we can target improvements correctly, I think we should know: * Who is the target audience to run our profiling tools? * What kind of information we do want? * Potential solution for the above. With those in mind I think that Thierry suggested STAP scripts. * Target audience - developers (us) and some “highly experienced” admins (STAP is not the easiest thing to run). * Information - STAP would largely tell us timing and possibly allows some variable/struct extraction. STAP does allow us to look at connection info too a bit easier. I would suggest an “event” struct, and logging service At the start of an operation we create an event struct. As we enter - exit a plugin we can append timing information, and the plugin itself can add details (for example, backend could add idl performance metrics or other). At the end of the operation, we log the event struct as a json blob to our access log associated to the conn/op. * Target - anyone, it’s a log level. Really easy to enable (Think mailing list or user support, can easily send us diagnostic logs) * Information - we need a bit more work to structure the “event” struct internally for profiling, but we’d get timings and possibly internal variable data as well in the event. I think these are two possible approaches. STAP is less invasive, easier to start now, but harder to extend later. Logging is more accessible to users/admins, easier to extend later, but more work to add now. What do we think? — Sincerely, William _______________________________________________ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to 389-devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject .org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidel ines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-de vel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx_______________________________________________ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to 389-devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.o rg Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelin es List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-deve l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx_______________________________________________ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to 389-devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
_______________________________________________ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to 389-devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
