ODIn/spark-instrumented-optimizer
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Wiki Activity
spark-instrumented-optimizer/core/benchmarks/KryoSerializerBenchmark-results.txt

13 lines
885 B
Plaintext
Raw Normal View History

[SPARK-25839][CORE] Implement use of KryoPool in KryoSerializer ## What changes were proposed in this pull request? * Implement (optional) use of KryoPool in KryoSerializer, an alternative to the existing implementation of caching a Kryo instance inside KryoSerializerInstance * Add config key & documentation of spark.kryo.pool in order to turn this on * Add benchmark KryoSerializerBenchmark to compare new and old implementation * Add results of benchmark ## How was this patch tested? Added new tests inside KryoSerializerSuite to test the pool implementation as well as added the pool option to the existing regression testing for SPARK-7766 This is my original work and I license the work to the project under the project’s open source license. Closes #22855 from patrickbrownsync/kryo-pool. Authored-by: Patrick Brown <patrick.brown@blyncsy.com> Signed-off-by: Sean Owen <sean.owen@databricks.com>
2018-11-10 13:51:24 -05:00
================================================================================================
[SPARK-29282][TESTS] Use the same VM configurations for test/benchmark ### What changes were proposed in this pull request? This PR aims to specify the JDK8 default configurations `-XX:+UseParallelGC -XX:-UseDynamicNumberOfGCThreads` explicitly. As we see in this PR [here](https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/25966/files#diff-12b89b7ee67c63c2254b749c8f8d0694R10), this will make the comparison between JDK8 and JDK11 easier by removing a misleading regression. **NOTE THAT THESE JVM CONFS ARE ONLY FOR BENCHMARK COMPARISON, NOT FOR A PRODUCTION** ### Why are the changes needed? There exists many JVM-level changes between JDK8 and JDK11. For example, the followings are notable changes and it turns out that especially (1) and (2) shows a misleading regression in our micro-benchmark environment because our microbenchmark uses small VM memory. 1. [JEP 248: Make G1 the Default Garbage Collector](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8073273) **JDK9+** 2. [Enable UseDynamicNumberOfGCThreads by default](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8198547) **JDK11+** 3. [Change default value of HeapSizePerGCThread](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8200417) **JDK11+** ### Does this PR introduce any user-facing change? No. ### How was this patch tested? This is a test-only JVM configuration change. Manually, run the benchmark. Closes #25966 from dongjoon-hyun/SPARK-29282. Authored-by: Dongjoon Hyun <dhyun@apple.com> Signed-off-by: Dongjoon Hyun <dhyun@apple.com>
2019-09-29 18:11:46 -04:00
Benchmark KryoPool vs old"pool of 1" implementation
[SPARK-25839][CORE] Implement use of KryoPool in KryoSerializer ## What changes were proposed in this pull request? * Implement (optional) use of KryoPool in KryoSerializer, an alternative to the existing implementation of caching a Kryo instance inside KryoSerializerInstance * Add config key & documentation of spark.kryo.pool in order to turn this on * Add benchmark KryoSerializerBenchmark to compare new and old implementation * Add results of benchmark ## How was this patch tested? Added new tests inside KryoSerializerSuite to test the pool implementation as well as added the pool option to the existing regression testing for SPARK-7766 This is my original work and I license the work to the project under the project’s open source license. Closes #22855 from patrickbrownsync/kryo-pool. Authored-by: Patrick Brown <patrick.brown@blyncsy.com> Signed-off-by: Sean Owen <sean.owen@databricks.com>
2018-11-10 13:51:24 -05:00
================================================================================================
[SPARK-34950][TESTS] Update benchmark results to the ones created by GitHub Actions machines ### What changes were proposed in this pull request? https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/32015 added a way to run benchmarks much more easily in the same GitHub Actions build. This PR updates the benchmark results by using the way. **NOTE** that looks like GitHub Actions use four types of CPU given my observations: - Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8171M CPU 2.60GHz - Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2673 v4 2.30GHz - Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2673 v3 2.40GHz - Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8272CL CPU 2.60GHz Given my quick research, seems like they perform roughly similarly: ![Screen Shot 2021-04-03 at 9 31 23 PM](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/6477701/113478478-f4b57b80-94c3-11eb-9047-f81ca8c59672.png) I couldn't find enough information about Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8272CL CPU 2.60GHz but the performance seems roughly similar given the numbers. So shouldn't be a big deal especially given that this way is much easier, encourages contributors to run more and guarantee the same number of cores and same memory with the same softwares. ### Why are the changes needed? To have a base line of the benchmarks accordingly. ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change? No, dev-only. ### How was this patch tested? It was generated from: - [Run benchmarks: * (JDK 11)](https://github.com/HyukjinKwon/spark/actions/runs/713575465) - [Run benchmarks: * (JDK 8)](https://github.com/HyukjinKwon/spark/actions/runs/713154337) Closes #32044 from HyukjinKwon/SPARK-34950. Authored-by: HyukjinKwon <gurwls223@apache.org> Signed-off-by: Max Gekk <max.gekk@gmail.com>
2021-04-03 16:02:56 -04:00
OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM 1.8.0_282-b08 on Linux 5.4.0-1043-azure
Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2673 v4 @ 2.30GHz
[SPARK-29282][TESTS] Use the same VM configurations for test/benchmark ### What changes were proposed in this pull request? This PR aims to specify the JDK8 default configurations `-XX:+UseParallelGC -XX:-UseDynamicNumberOfGCThreads` explicitly. As we see in this PR [here](https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/25966/files#diff-12b89b7ee67c63c2254b749c8f8d0694R10), this will make the comparison between JDK8 and JDK11 easier by removing a misleading regression. **NOTE THAT THESE JVM CONFS ARE ONLY FOR BENCHMARK COMPARISON, NOT FOR A PRODUCTION** ### Why are the changes needed? There exists many JVM-level changes between JDK8 and JDK11. For example, the followings are notable changes and it turns out that especially (1) and (2) shows a misleading regression in our micro-benchmark environment because our microbenchmark uses small VM memory. 1. [JEP 248: Make G1 the Default Garbage Collector](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8073273) **JDK9+** 2. [Enable UseDynamicNumberOfGCThreads by default](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8198547) **JDK11+** 3. [Change default value of HeapSizePerGCThread](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8200417) **JDK11+** ### Does this PR introduce any user-facing change? No. ### How was this patch tested? This is a test-only JVM configuration change. Manually, run the benchmark. Closes #25966 from dongjoon-hyun/SPARK-29282. Authored-by: Dongjoon Hyun <dhyun@apple.com> Signed-off-by: Dongjoon Hyun <dhyun@apple.com>
2019-09-29 18:11:46 -04:00
Benchmark KryoPool vs old"pool of 1" implementation: Best Time(ms) Avg Time(ms) Stdev(ms) Rate(M/s) Per Row(ns) Relative
[SPARK-34950][TESTS] Update benchmark results to the ones created by GitHub Actions machines ### What changes were proposed in this pull request? https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/32015 added a way to run benchmarks much more easily in the same GitHub Actions build. This PR updates the benchmark results by using the way. **NOTE** that looks like GitHub Actions use four types of CPU given my observations: - Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8171M CPU 2.60GHz - Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2673 v4 2.30GHz - Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2673 v3 2.40GHz - Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8272CL CPU 2.60GHz Given my quick research, seems like they perform roughly similarly: ![Screen Shot 2021-04-03 at 9 31 23 PM](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/6477701/113478478-f4b57b80-94c3-11eb-9047-f81ca8c59672.png) I couldn't find enough information about Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8272CL CPU 2.60GHz but the performance seems roughly similar given the numbers. So shouldn't be a big deal especially given that this way is much easier, encourages contributors to run more and guarantee the same number of cores and same memory with the same softwares. ### Why are the changes needed? To have a base line of the benchmarks accordingly. ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change? No, dev-only. ### How was this patch tested? It was generated from: - [Run benchmarks: * (JDK 11)](https://github.com/HyukjinKwon/spark/actions/runs/713575465) - [Run benchmarks: * (JDK 8)](https://github.com/HyukjinKwon/spark/actions/runs/713154337) Closes #32044 from HyukjinKwon/SPARK-34950. Authored-by: HyukjinKwon <gurwls223@apache.org> Signed-off-by: Max Gekk <max.gekk@gmail.com>
2021-04-03 16:02:56 -04:00
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
KryoPool:true 7893 10556 NaN 0.0 15785307.8 1.0X
KryoPool:false 12778 15741 426 0.0 25555753.8 0.6X
[SPARK-25839][CORE] Implement use of KryoPool in KryoSerializer ## What changes were proposed in this pull request? * Implement (optional) use of KryoPool in KryoSerializer, an alternative to the existing implementation of caching a Kryo instance inside KryoSerializerInstance * Add config key & documentation of spark.kryo.pool in order to turn this on * Add benchmark KryoSerializerBenchmark to compare new and old implementation * Add results of benchmark ## How was this patch tested? Added new tests inside KryoSerializerSuite to test the pool implementation as well as added the pool option to the existing regression testing for SPARK-7766 This is my original work and I license the work to the project under the project’s open source license. Closes #22855 from patrickbrownsync/kryo-pool. Authored-by: Patrick Brown <patrick.brown@blyncsy.com> Signed-off-by: Sean Owen <sean.owen@databricks.com>
2018-11-10 13:51:24 -05:00
Reference in a new issue Copy permalink