Re: Speed up transaction completion faster after many relations are accessed in a transaction

On Sat, 1 Jan 2022 at 15:40, Zhihong Yu <zyu(at)yugabyte(dot)com> wrote:
> + locallock->nLocks -= locallockowner->nLocks;
> + Assert(locallock->nLocks >= 0);
>
> I think the assertion is not needed since the above code is in if block :
>
> + if (locallockowner->nLocks < locallock->nLocks)
>
> the condition, locallock->nLocks >= 0, would always hold after the subtraction.

That makes sense. I've removed the Assert in the attached patch.
Thanks for looking at the patch

I've also spent a bit more time on the patch. There were quite a few
outdated comments remaining. Also, the PROCLOCK releaseMask field
appears to no longer be needed.

I also did a round of benchmarking on the attached patch using a very
recent master. I've attached .sql files and the script I used to
benchmark.

With 1024 partitions, lock1.sql shows about a 4.75% performance
increase. This would become larger with more partitions and less with
fewer partitions.
With the patch, lock2.sql about a 10% performance increase over master.
lock3.sql does not seem to have changed much and lock4.sql shows a
small regression with the patch of about 2.5%.

I'm not quite sure how worried we should be about lock4.sql slowing
down lightly. 2.5% is fairly small given how hard I'm exercising the
locking code in that test. There's also nothing much to say that the
slowdown is not just due to code alignment changes.

I also understand that Amit L is working on another patch that will
improve the situation for lock1.sql by not taking the locks on
relations that will be run-time pruned at executor startup. I think
it's still worth solving this regardless of Amit's patch as with
current master we still have a situation where short fast queries
which access a small number of tables can become slower once the
backend has obtained a large number of locks concurrently and bloated
the locallocktable.

As for the patch. I feel it's a pretty invasive change to how we
release locks and the resowner code. I'd be quite happy for some
review of it.

Here are the full results as output by the attached script.

drowley(at)amd3990x:~$ echo master
master
drowley(at)amd3990x:~$ ./lockbench.sh
lock1.sql
tps = 38078.011433 (without initial connection time)
tps = 38070.016792 (without initial connection time)
tps = 39223.118769 (without initial connection time)
tps = 37510.105287 (without initial connection time)
tps = 38164.394128 (without initial connection time)
lock2.sql
tps = 247.963797 (without initial connection time)
tps = 247.374174 (without initial connection time)
tps = 248.412744 (without initial connection time)
tps = 248.192629 (without initial connection time)
tps = 248.503728 (without initial connection time)
lock3.sql
tps = 1162.937692 (without initial connection time)
tps = 1160.968689 (without initial connection time)
tps = 1166.908643 (without initial connection time)
tps = 1160.288547 (without initial connection time)
tps = 1160.336572 (without initial connection time)
lock4.sql
tps = 282.173560 (without initial connection time)
tps = 284.470330 (without initial connection time)
tps = 286.089644 (without initial connection time)
tps = 285.548487 (without initial connection time)
tps = 284.313505 (without initial connection time)

drowley(at)amd3990x:~$ echo Patched
Patched
drowley(at)amd3990x:~$ ./lockbench.sh
lock1.sql
tps = 40338.975219 (without initial connection time)
tps = 39803.433365 (without initial connection time)
tps = 39504.824194 (without initial connection time)
tps = 39843.422438 (without initial connection time)
tps = 40624.483013 (without initial connection time)
lock2.sql
tps = 274.413309 (without initial connection time)
tps = 271.978813 (without initial connection time)
tps = 275.795091 (without initial connection time)
tps = 273.628649 (without initial connection time)
tps = 273.049977 (without initial connection time)
lock3.sql
tps = 1168.557054 (without initial connection time)
tps = 1168.139469 (without initial connection time)
tps = 1166.366440 (without initial connection time)
tps = 1165.464214 (without initial connection time)
tps = 1167.250809 (without initial connection time)
lock4.sql
tps = 274.842298 (without initial connection time)
tps = 277.911394 (without initial connection time)
tps = 278.702620 (without initial connection time)
tps = 275.715606 (without initial connection time)
tps = 278.816060 (without initial connection time)

David