Date post: | 14-Jan-2015 |
Category: |
Technology |
Upload: | theo-schlossnagle |
View: | 2,118 times |
Download: | 1 times |
/
Building Scalable Systemsan Asynchronous Approach
pleasure and pain
Monday, June 20, 2011
Who am I? @postwait on twitter
Author of “Scalable Internet Architectures”Pearson, ISBN: 067232699X
Contributor to “Web Operations”O’Reilly, ISBN:
Founder of OmniTI, Message Systems, Fontdeck, & CirconusI like to tackle problems that are “always on” and “always growing.”
I am an EngineerA practitioner of academic computing.IEEE member and Senior ACM member.On the Editorial Board of ACM’s Queue magazine.
2
Monday, June 20, 2011
/
Some rants about systems.
cutting through the crap
Monday, June 20, 2011
BIG data
• BIG data: doesn’t exist
• but it sure is a good way to market things.
• If you measure things in petabytesas we have for the last several yearsyou have data, not BIG data.
Monday, June 20, 2011
Data stores
• “new” NoSQL systems can scale better than an RDBMS
• yes
• They scale better than sharded RDBMS
• no
• I need NoSQL systems for “BIG” data.
• no
Monday, June 20, 2011
Why NoSQL
• The choice to use a NoSQL system is driven by:
• a more suitable data model
• we desire to shift our CAP theorem constraints
Monday, June 20, 2011
The cloud
• The cloud is not magic.
• The cloud enables engineers to rapidly deploy an architecture to run an application.
• There is nothing wrong with this.
Monday, June 20, 2011
The cloud: gotcha 1
• Provisioning services “the old way” took time due to:
• installing systems
• install packages
• determining and enforcing data security
• determining and enforcing SLA monitoring
• determining and enforcing DR: RPO and RTO
• documenting escalation and remediation efforts
Monday, June 20, 2011
The cloud: gotcha 2
• Quality of service in multi-tenancy environments is a very, very hard problem.
• In fact, no one has solved it.
Monday, June 20, 2011
The cloud: gotcha 3
• Platform as a service provides:
• MySQL? PostgreSQL? Redis? Node.js?
• .. patched.
• .. patched.
• .. patched.
• .. patched.
Monday, June 20, 2011
The cloud: gotcha 4
• Scaling isn’t magic pixie dust.
• “I can run more instances of my app.”
• horribly false sense of security.
• You must have a scalable architecture
Monday, June 20, 2011
/
Design & Implementation Techniques
some say architecture != implementation
Monday, June 20, 2011
Architecture vs. Implementation
Monday, June 20, 2011
Architecture vs. Implementation
Architecture is without specification of the vendor,make, and model of components.
Monday, June 20, 2011
Architecture vs. Implementation
Architecture is without specification of the vendor,make, and model of components.
Implementation is the adaptation of an architectureto embrace available technologies.
Monday, June 20, 2011
Architecture vs. Implementation
Architecture is without specification of the vendor,make, and model of components.
Implementation is the adaptation of an architectureto embrace available technologies.
They are intrinsically tied.Insisting on separation is a metaphysical argument(with no winners)
Monday, June 20, 2011
Respect Engineering Math
Engineering math:
19 + 89 = 110
“Precise” Math:
19 + 89 = 10.8
Monday, June 20, 2011
Respect Engineering Math
Engineering math:
19 + 89 = 110
“Precise” Math:
19 + 89 = 10.8
Ok. Ok. I must have, I must have put a decimal point in the wrong place or something. Shit. I always do that. I always mess up some mundane detail.
- Michael Bolton in Office Space
Monday, June 20, 2011
Ensure the gods aren’t angry.
Monday, June 20, 2011
Ensure the gods aren’t angry.
Bob: We need to grow our cluster of web servers.
Monday, June 20, 2011
Ensure the gods aren’t angry.
Bob: We need to grow our cluster of web servers.
Alice: How many requests per second do they do, how many do you have and what is their current resource utilization?
Monday, June 20, 2011
Ensure the gods aren’t angry.
Bob: We need to grow our cluster of web servers.
Alice: How many requests per second do they do, how many do you have and what is their current resource utilization?
Bob: About 200 req/second, 8 servers and they have no headroom.
Monday, June 20, 2011
Ensure the gods aren’t angry.
Bob: We need to grow our cluster of web servers.
Alice: How many requests per second do they do, how many do you have and what is their current resource utilization?
Bob: About 200 req/second, 8 servers and they have no headroom.
Alice: How many req/second do you need?
Monday, June 20, 2011
Ensure the gods aren’t angry.
Bob: We need to grow our cluster of web servers.
Alice: How many requests per second do they do, how many do you have and what is their current resource utilization?
Bob: About 200 req/second, 8 servers and they have no headroom.
Alice: How many req/second do you need?
Bob: 800 req/second would be good.
Monday, June 20, 2011
Ensure the gods aren’t angry.
Bob: We need to grow our cluster of web servers.
Alice: How many requests per second do they do, how many do you have and what is their current resource utilization?
Bob: About 200 req/second, 8 servers and they have no headroom.
Alice: How many req/second do you need?
Bob: 800 req/second would be good.
Alice: Um, Bob, 200 x 8 = 1600... you have 50% headroom on your goal.
Monday, June 20, 2011
Ensure the gods aren’t angry.
Bob: We need to grow our cluster of web servers.
Alice: How many requests per second do they do, how many do you have and what is their current resource utilization?
Bob: About 200 req/second, 8 servers and they have no headroom.
Alice: How many req/second do you need?
Bob: 800 req/second would be good.
Alice: Um, Bob, 200 x 8 = 1600... you have 50% headroom on your goal.
Bob: No... 200 / 8 = 25 req/second per server.
Monday, June 20, 2011
Ensure the gods aren’t angry.
Bob: We need to grow our cluster of web servers.
Alice: How many requests per second do they do, how many do you have and what is their current resource utilization?
Bob: About 200 req/second, 8 servers and they have no headroom.
Alice: How many req/second do you need?
Bob: 800 req/second would be good.
Alice: Um, Bob, 200 x 8 = 1600... you have 50% headroom on your goal.
Bob: No... 200 / 8 = 25 req/second per server.
Alice: Bob... the gods are angry.
Monday, June 20, 2011
Why you’ve pissed off the gods.
Monday, June 20, 2011
Why you’ve pissed off the gods.
Most web apps are CPU bound (as I/O happens on a different layer)
Monday, June 20, 2011
Why you’ve pissed off the gods.
Most web apps are CPU bound (as I/O happens on a different layer)
Typical box today: 8 cores are 2.8GHz or 22.4 BILLION instructions per second.
Monday, June 20, 2011
Why you’ve pissed off the gods.
Most web apps are CPU bound (as I/O happens on a different layer)
Typical box today: 8 cores are 2.8GHz or 22.4 BILLION instructions per second.
22x109 instr/s / 25 req/s = 880 MILLION instructions per request.
Monday, June 20, 2011
Why you’ve pissed off the gods.
Most web apps are CPU bound (as I/O happens on a different layer)
Typical box today: 8 cores are 2.8GHz or 22.4 BILLION instructions per second.
22x109 instr/s / 25 req/s = 880 MILLION instructions per request.
This same effort (per-request) provided me with approximately15 minutes enjoying “Might & Magic 2” on my Apple IIe- you’ve certainly pissed me off.
Monday, June 20, 2011
Why you’ve pissed off the gods.
Most web apps are CPU bound (as I/O happens on a different layer)
Typical box today: 8 cores are 2.8GHz or 22.4 BILLION instructions per second.
22x109 instr/s / 25 req/s = 880 MILLION instructions per request.
This same effort (per-request) provided me with approximately15 minutes enjoying “Might & Magic 2” on my Apple IIe- you’ve certainly pissed me off.
No wonder the gods are angry.
Monday, June 20, 2011
Develop a model
Monday, June 20, 2011
Develop a model
Queue theoretic models are for “other people.”
Monday, June 20, 2011
Develop a model
Queue theoretic models are for “other people.”
Sorta, not really.
Monday, June 20, 2011
Develop a model
Queue theoretic models are for “other people.”
Sorta, not really.
Problems:
Monday, June 20, 2011
Develop a model
Queue theoretic models are for “other people.”
Sorta, not really.
Problems:
very hard to develop a complete and accurate model
Monday, June 20, 2011
Develop a model
Queue theoretic models are for “other people.”
Sorta, not really.
Problems:
very hard to develop a complete and accurate model
Benefits:
Monday, June 20, 2011
Develop a model
Queue theoretic models are for “other people.”
Sorta, not really.
Problems:
very hard to develop a complete and accurate model
Benefits:
provides insight on architecture capacitance dependencies
Monday, June 20, 2011
Develop a model
Queue theoretic models are for “other people.”
Sorta, not really.
Problems:
very hard to develop a complete and accurate model
Benefits:
provides insight on architecture capacitance dependencies
relatively easy to understand
Monday, June 20, 2011
Develop a model
Queue theoretic models are for “other people.”
Sorta, not really.
Problems:
very hard to develop a complete and accurate model
Benefits:
provides insight on architecture capacitance dependencies
relatively easy to understand
illustrates opportunities to further isolate work
Monday, June 20, 2011
Rationalize your model
Monday, June 20, 2011
Rationalize your model
Draw your model out
Monday, June 20, 2011
Rationalize your model
Draw your model out
Take measurements and walk through the model to rationalize iti.e. prove it to be empirically correct
Monday, June 20, 2011
Rationalize your model
Draw your model out
Take measurements and walk through the model to rationalize iti.e. prove it to be empirically correct
You should be able to map actions to consequences:
Monday, June 20, 2011
Rationalize your model
Draw your model out
Take measurements and walk through the model to rationalize iti.e. prove it to be empirically correct
You should be able to map actions to consequences:
A user signs up ➙ 4 synchronous DB inserts (1 synch IOPS + 4 asynch writes) 1 AMQP durable, persistent message 1 asynch DB read ➙ 1/10 IOPS writing new Lucene indexes
Monday, June 20, 2011
Rationalize your model
Draw your model out
Take measurements and walk through the model to rationalize iti.e. prove it to be empirically correct
You should be able to map actions to consequences:
A user signs up ➙ 4 synchronous DB inserts (1 synch IOPS + 4 asynch writes) 1 AMQP durable, persistent message 1 asynch DB read ➙ 1/10 IOPS writing new Lucene indexes
In a dev environment, simulate traffic and rationalize your model
Monday, June 20, 2011
Rationalize your model
Draw your model out
Take measurements and walk through the model to rationalize iti.e. prove it to be empirically correct
You should be able to map actions to consequences:
A user signs up ➙ 4 synchronous DB inserts (1 synch IOPS + 4 asynch writes) 1 AMQP durable, persistent message 1 asynch DB read ➙ 1/10 IOPS writing new Lucene indexes
In a dev environment, simulate traffic and rationalize your model
I call this a “data flow causality map”
Monday, June 20, 2011
Complexity will eat your lunch
Monday, June 20, 2011
Complexity will eat your lunch
there will always be empirical variance from your model
Monday, June 20, 2011
Complexity will eat your lunch
there will always be empirical variance from your model
explaining the phantoms leads to enlightenment
Monday, June 20, 2011
Complexity will eat your lunch
there will always be empirical variance from your model
explaining the phantoms leads to enlightenment
service decoupling in complex systems gives:
Monday, June 20, 2011
Complexity will eat your lunch
there will always be empirical variance from your model
explaining the phantoms leads to enlightenment
service decoupling in complex systems gives:
simplified modeling and capacity planning
Monday, June 20, 2011
Complexity will eat your lunch
there will always be empirical variance from your model
explaining the phantoms leads to enlightenment
service decoupling in complex systems gives:
simplified modeling and capacity planning
slight inefficiencies
Monday, June 20, 2011
Complexity will eat your lunch
there will always be empirical variance from your model
explaining the phantoms leads to enlightenment
service decoupling in complex systems gives:
simplified modeling and capacity planning
slight inefficiencies
promotes lower contention
Monday, June 20, 2011
Complexity will eat your lunch
there will always be empirical variance from your model
explaining the phantoms leads to enlightenment
service decoupling in complex systems gives:
simplified modeling and capacity planning
slight inefficiencies
promotes lower contention
requires design of systems with less coherency requirements
Monday, June 20, 2011
Complexity will eat your lunch
there will always be empirical variance from your model
explaining the phantoms leads to enlightenment
service decoupling in complex systems gives:
simplified modeling and capacity planning
slight inefficiencies
promotes lower contention
requires design of systems with less coherency requirements
each isolated service is simpler and safer
Monday, June 20, 2011
Complexity will eat your lunch
there will always be empirical variance from your model
explaining the phantoms leads to enlightenment
service decoupling in complex systems gives:
simplified modeling and capacity planning
slight inefficiencies
promotes lower contention
requires design of systems with less coherency requirements
each isolated service is simpler and safer
SCALES.
Monday, June 20, 2011
/
Asynchronous Systems
it’s likely you have no idea what you’re doing
Monday, June 20, 2011
Asychronous
• of or requiring a form of computer control timing protocol in which a specific operation begins upon receipt of an indication (signal) that the preceding operation has been completed.
• ...or “I’ll act when you tell me you are done”
• ...or a protocol wherein the initiation of a task and the report of its completion are separate operations.
Monday, June 20, 2011
Protocols
• Standards:
• AMQP(impl: ActiveMQ, RabbitMQ, OpenAMQ, etc.)
• Others:
• ZeroMQ
• Gearman
Monday, June 20, 2011
Guarantees
• Queueing protocols can be misleading.
• Are you sure you did what you think you did?
• Let’s use a publish as an example.
Monday, June 20, 2011
Publication
• Imagine a Queue:
• You assume that by calling “publish” thatyour message is placed on the queue andwill eventually be consumed(assuming a consumer).
• Most systems are ‘more’ asynchronous than that.
Monday, June 20, 2011
Publication what you think happens
Kernel Network Stack Network Stack Queue
message framewrite
User Space
publish
SAFE
read
message framewritepublish read
BOOMwritemessage framereaderror
call
return
writemessage framereaderror
call
return
Monday, June 20, 2011
Publication what really happens
Kernel Network Stack Network Stack Queue
message framewrite
User Space
publish
SAFE
read
message framewritepublish
read
BOOMwrite
message framereaderror
call
return
call
return
return
Monday, June 20, 2011
Why?
• Why do queueing protocols use
“silence for success?”
• Simple: performance
• no need for a roundtrip before the next message
• success is common, failure rare
Monday, June 20, 2011
Why?
• AMQP is not alone in this...
• 0MQ as well.
Monday, June 20, 2011
Now what?
• In each component you must decide if you need:
• synchronous system w/ synchronous protocol
• asynchronous system w/ synchronous protocol
• asynchronous system w/ asynchronous protocol
Monday, June 20, 2011
Service decisions
• Knowing you can lose messages is... okay?
• it can be
• there are plenty of uses for unreliable communications
• however... generally,it is much easier to build services that have end-to-end guarantees.
Monday, June 20, 2011
Non-asynchronous: synchronous
Kernel Network Stack Network Stack Database
message framewrite
User Space
publish
SAFE
read
message framewritepublish read
BOOMwritemessage framereaderror
call
return
writemessage framereaderror
call
return
Monday, June 20, 2011
Asynchronous to the purpose
• Why is a Queue “asynchronous”
• and a Database “synchronous”
• I lied... “asynchronous” is “to the purpose.”
• If the ultimate, final goal is: storage in a DB
• and you return the result only after a commit
• then you are synchronous
Monday, June 20, 2011
Simple example: image thumbnailing
• A user uploads an email to a web site
• you need to produce 7 different transformations
• (size, color, etc.)
• Asynchronous system:
• synchronous upload protocol:
• user upload -> thank you we have it
• asynchronous processing
• file -> 7 mutations
Monday, June 20, 2011
/
A (more) complete example.
foursquare-like, untappd.com-like service
Monday, June 20, 2011
Better example: rewards calculation
• A user performs an action on your site
• and you need to reward them based on:
• social network, history, value
• you want to show them their reward “immediately.”
• Step 1: engineer for failure.
Monday, June 20, 2011
Rewards calculation: step 1
• the inability to calculate the rewardshall not prevent the action.(think: beer checkin on untappd)
• I want the reward calculation immediately.
• I need the checkin to be recorded.
Monday, June 20, 2011
Rewards calculation: step 2
• Decouple the rewards calculation:
1. receive user request
2. store(C)
3. queue the checkin(C) on QC
4. wait up to 500ms (reading rewards R from QR)
5. return R witnessed.
Monday, June 20, 2011
Rewards calculation: step 3
• Decouple the rewards calculation:
1. dequeue checkin: C from QC
2. calculate rewards(C) -> R
3. store(R)
4. queue(R) on QR
Monday, June 20, 2011
Rewards calculation: win
• You win big.
• If the rewards calculation system is
• too slow, or
• goes offline
• checkins still proceed and
• responses are served within 500ms
• You have decoupled the service availability requirements of the checkin system from the rewards system: happier users.
Monday, June 20, 2011
/
Final random thoughts
think outside of the box
Monday, June 20, 2011
Things to look at: free your mind
• Node.js
• Javascript? Seriously?
• Yes.
• Forces you to think asynchronously
• Forces you to share nothing
• Forces you to build stateless systems
• These systems scale
Monday, June 20, 2011
unsafe: when to use
• “silence is success” messaging is almost always useful when new, more temporally relevant data is bound to arrive.
• game location data
• performance data
• status data
• the casual observer
Monday, June 20, 2011
be mindful
• Always monitor:
• message rates
• queue depths
• queue counts
• connection concurrency
Monday, June 20, 2011
Thank you.
• Thank you
• Merci beaucoup.
Monday, June 20, 2011