Capriccio- Scalable Threads for Internet Service.ppt

《Capriccio- Scalable Threads for Internet Service.ppt》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《Capriccio- Scalable Threads for Internet Service.ppt（46页珍藏版）》请在麦多课文档分享上搜索。

1、Capriccio: Scalable Threads for Internet Service,Introduction,Internet services have ever-increasing scalability demands Current hardware is meeting these demands Software has lagged behind Recent approaches are event-based Pipeline stages of events,Drawbacks of Events,Events systems hide the contro

2、l flow Difficult to understand and debug Eventually evolved into call-and-return event pairs Programmers need to match related events Need to save/restore states Capriccio: instead of event-based model, fix the thread-based model,Goals of Capriccio,Support for existing thread API Little changes to e

3、xisting applications Scalability to thousands of threads One thread per execution Flexibility to address application-specific needs,Performance,Ease of Programming,Threads,Threads,Events,Ideal,Thread Design Principles,Kernel-level threads are for true concurrency User-level threads provide a clean p

4、rogramming model with useful invariants and semantics Decouple user from kernel level threads More portable,Capriccio,Thread package All thread operations are O(1) Linked stacks Address the problem of stack allocation for large numbers of threads Combination of compile-time and run-time analysis Res

5、ource-aware scheduler,Thread Design and Scalability,POSIX API Backward compatible,User-Level Threads,+ Performance + Flexibility - Complex preemption - Bad interaction with kernel scheduler,Flexibility,Decoupling user and kernel threads allows faster innovation Can use new kernel thread features wit

6、hout changing application code Scheduler tailored for applications Lightweight,Performance,Reduce the overhead of thread synchronization No kernel crossing for preemptive threading More efficient memory management at user level,Disadvantages,Need to replace blocking calls with nonblocking ones to ho

7、ld the CPU Translation overhead Problems with multiple processors Synchronization becomes more expensive,Context Switches,Built on top of Edgar Toernigs coroutine library Fast context switches when threads voluntarily yield,I/O,Capriccio intercepts blocking I/O calls Uses epoll for asynchronous I/O,

8、Scheduling,Very much like an event-driven application Events are hidden from programmers,Synchronization,Supports cooperative threading on single-CPU machines Requires only Boolean checks,Threading Microbenchmarks,SMP, two 2.4 GHz Xeon processors 1 GB memory two 10 K RPM SCSI Ultra II hard drives Li

9、nux 2.5.70 Compared Capriccio, LinuxThreads, and Native POSIX Threads for Linux,Latencies of Thread Primitives,Thread Scalability,Producer-consumer microbenchmark LinuxThreads begin to degrade after 20 threads NPTL degrades after 100 Capriccio scales to 32K producers and consumers (64K threads total

10、),Thread Scalability,I/O Performance,Network performance Token passing among pipes Simulates the effect of slow client links 10% overhead compared to epoll Twice as fast as both LinuxThreads and NPTL when more than 1000 threads Disk I/O comparable to kernel threads,Linked Stack Management,LinuxThrea

11、ds allocates 2MB per stack 1 GB of VM holds only 500 threads,Fixed Stacks,Linked Stack Management,But most threads consumes only a few KB of stack space at a given time Dynamic stack allocation can significantly reduce the size of VM,Linked Stack,Compiler Analysis and Linked Stacks,Whole-program ana

12、lysis Based on the call graph Problematic for recursions Static estimation may be too conservative,Compiler Analysis and Linked Stacks,Grow and shrink the stack size on demand Insert checkpoints to determine whether we need to allocate more before the next checkpoint Result in noncontiguous stacks,P

13、lacing Checkpoints,One checkpoint in every cycle in the call graph Bound the size between checkpoints with the deepest call path,Dealing with Special Cases,Function pointers Dont know what procedure to call at compile time Can find a potential set of procedures,Dealing with Special Cases,External fu

14、nctions Allow programmers to annotate external library functions with trusted stack bounds Allow larger stack chunks to be linked for external functions,Tuning the Algorithm,Stack space can be wasted Internal and external fragmentation Tradeoffs Number of stack linkings External fragmentation,Memory

15、 Benefits,Tuning can be application-specific No preallocation of large stacks Reduced requirement to run a large numbers of threads Better paging behavior StacksLIFO,Case Study: Apache 2.0.44,Maximum stack allocation chunk: 2KB Apache under SPECweb99 Overall slowdown is about 3% Dynamic allocation 0

16、.1% Link to large chunks for external functions 0.5% Stack removal 10%,Resource-Aware Scheduling,Advantages of event-based scheduling Tailored for applications With event handlers Events provide two important pieces of information for scheduling Whether a process is close to completion Whether a sys

17、tem is overloaded,Resource-Aware Scheduling,Thread-based View applications as sequence of stages, separated by blocking calls Analogous to event-based scheduler,Blocking Graph,Node: A location in the program that blocked Edge: between two nodes if they were consecutive blocking points Generated at r

18、untime,Resource-Aware Scheduling,1. Keep track of resource utilization 2. Annotate each node with resource used and its outgoing edges 3. Dynamically prioritize nodes Prefer nodes that release resources,Resources,CPU Memory (malloc) File descriptors (open, close),Pitfalls,Tricky to determine the max

19、imum capacity of a resource Thrashing depends on the workload Disk can handle more requests that are sequential instead of random Resources interact VM vs. disk Applications may manage memory themselves,Yield Profiling,User threads are problematic if a thread fails to yield They are easy to detect,

20、since their running times are orders of magnitude larger Yield profiling identifies places where programs fail to yield sufficiently often,Web Server Performance,4x500 MHz Pentium server 2GB memory Intel e1000 Gigabit Ethernet card Linux 2.4.20 Workload: requests for 3.2 GB of static file data,Web S

21、erver Performance,Request frequencies match those of the SPECweb99 A client connects to a server repeated and issue a series of five requests, separated by 20ms pauses Apaches performance improved by 15% with Capriccio,Resource-Aware Admission Control,Consumer-producer applications Producer loops, a

22、dding memory, and randomly touching pages Consumer loops, removing memory from the pool and freeing it Fast producer may run out of virtual address space,Resource-Aware Admission Control,Touching pages too quickly will cause thrashing Capriccio can quickly detect the overload conditions and limit th

23、e number of producers,Programming Models for High Concurrency,Event Application-specific optimization Thread Efficient thread runtimes,User-Level Threads,Capriccio is unique Blocking graph Resource-aware scheduling Target at a large number of blocking threads POSIX compliant,Application-Specific Optimization,Most approaches require programmers to tailor their application to manage resources Nonstandard APIs, less portable,Stack Management,No garbage collection,Future Work,Multi-CPU machines Profiling tools for system tuning,