[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-29222?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17954623#comment-17954623
]
Hudson commented on HBASE-29222:
--------------------------------
Results for branch branch-2.6
[build #320 on
builds.a.o|https://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-2.6/320/]:
(x) *{color:red}-1 overall{color}*
----
details (if available):
(/) {color:green}+1 general checks{color}
-- For more information [see general
report|https://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-2.6/320/General_20Nightly_20Build_20Report/]
(x) {color:red}-1 jdk8 hadoop2 checks{color}
-- For more information [see jdk8 (hadoop2)
report|https://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-2.6/320/JDK8_20Nightly_20Build_20Report_20_28Hadoop2_29/]
(x) {color:red}-1 jdk8 hadoop3 checks{color}
-- For more information [see jdk8 (hadoop3)
report|https://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-2.6/320/JDK8_20Nightly_20Build_20Report_20_28Hadoop3_29/]
(x) {color:red}-1 jdk11 hadoop3 checks{color}
-- For more information [see jdk11
report|https://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-2.6/320/JDK11_20Nightly_20Build_20Report_20_28Hadoop3_29/]
(x) {color:red}-1 jdk17 hadoop3 checks{color}
-- For more information [see jdk17
report|https://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-2.6/320/JDK17_20Nightly_20Build_20Report_20_28Hadoop3_29/]
(/) {color:green}+1 jdk17 hadoop 3.3.5 backward compatibility checks{color}
-- For more information [see jdk17
report|https://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-2.6/320/JDK17_20Nightly_20Build_20Report_20_28Hadoop3_29/]
(x) {color:red}-1 source release artifact{color}
-- Something went wrong with this stage, [check relevant console
output|https://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-2.6/320//console].
(x) {color:red}-1 client integration test{color}
-- Something went wrong with this stage, [check relevant console
output|https://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-2.6/320//console].
> Avoid expensive tracing calls if tracing is disabled
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-29222
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-29222
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: tracing
> Affects Versions: 3.0.0-beta-1, 2.5.11, 2.6.2
> Reporter: Becker Ewing
> Assignee: Becker Ewing
> Priority: Major
> Labels: pull-request-available
> Fix For: 2.7.0, 3.0.0-beta-2, 2.6.3
>
> Attachments: slow-decompressor-reinit.2.html
>
>
> Building off of https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-29099—where we
> removed certain expensive calls if tracing was disabled—it appears that there
> is more opportunities to avoid allocating/recording trace metadata if we can
> determine that a trace is disabled.
> This is inspired by a glance at the first flamegraph in
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-29218 where we spent an aggregate
> 1.48% of all CPU time in OpenTelemetry calls (I filtered for "io/opentelem").
> Given that tracing is an opt-in feature, we ideally shouldn't impose a
> performance penalty if it isn't enabled. Span Calls in the Block I/O Path
> (particularly those in BlockIOUtils & HFileBlock) look to dominate this
> flamegraph. We should ensure that we're only recording expensive attributes
> if tracing is enabled in those paths.
> As it stands now, BlockIOUtils#readWithExtra spends 40% of it's time in
> OpenTelemetry calls and the rest of it's time reading data from the
> filesystem which shows the non-trivial nature of the tracing context being
> recorded.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
