Hi Rajul,

For the `agent idea`, I think it is very good.
However, in OpenStack, that idea may be really hard for us.
The reason is the same with what Boris think.

For the sampling part, head-based sampling can be implemented in OSprofiler.
For tail-based and adaptive sampling, it is another story.
However, in naïve way, we can use sampling abilities from other OpenTracing 
compatible tracers
such as Uber Jaeger, Appdash, Zipkin (has an open pull request), LighStep … by 
making OSprofiler
compatible with OpenTracing API.

ICYMI, Boris is father of OSprofiler in OpenStack [1]

[1] 
https://specs.openstack.org/openstack/oslo-specs/specs/mitaka/osprofiler-cross-service-project-profiling.html

Best regards,

Vinh Nguyen Trong
PODC – Fujitsu Vietnam Ltd.

From: Rajul Kumar [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Friday, 04 August, 2017 03:49
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) 
<[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo][performance] Proposing tail-based sampling 
in OSProfiler

Hi Boris

That is a point of concern.
Can you please direct to any of those?

Anyways, we don't have anything in place for OpenStack yet.
Now, either we pick another tracing solution like Zipkin, Jaeger etc. which 
have their own limitations OR enhance OSProfiler.
We pick the later as it's most native and better coupled with OpenStack as of 
now.
I understand that we may be blocked by these issues. However, I feel it'll be 
better to fight with OSProfiler than anything else till we come up with 
something better :)

Thanks
Rajul



On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 4:01 PM, Boris Pavlovic 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Rajul,

May I ask why you think so?

Exposed by OSprofiler issues are going to be really hard to fix in current 
OpenStack architecture.

Best regards,
Boris Pavlovic

On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 12:56 PM, Rajul Kumar 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hi Boris

Good to hear from you.
May I ask why you think so?

We do see some potential with OSProfiler for this and further objectives.

Thanks
Rajul

On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 3:48 PM, Boris Pavlovic 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Rajul,

It makes sense! However, maybe it's a bit too late... ;)

Best regards,
Boris Pavlovic

On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 12:16 PM, Rajul Kumar 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hello everyone

I have added a blueprint on having tail-based sampling as a sampling option for 
continuous tracing in OSProfiler. It would be really helpful to have some 
thoughts, ideas, comments on this from the community.

Continuous tracing provides a good insight on how various transactions behave 
across in a distributed system. Currently, OpenStack doesn't have a defined 
solution for continuous tracing. Though, it has OSProfiler that does generates 
selective traces, it may not capture the occurrence. Even if we have OSProfiler 
running continuously [1], we need to sample the traces so as to cut down the 
data generated and still keep the useful info.

Head based sampling can be applied that decides initially whether a trace 
should be saved or not. However, it may miss out on some useful traces. I 
propose to have tail-based sampling [2] mechanism that makes the decision at 
the end of the transaction and tends to keep all the useful traces. This may 
require a lot of changes depending on what all type of info is required and the 
solution that we pick to implement it [2]. This may not affect the current 
working of any of the services on OpenStack as it will be off the critical path 
[3].

Please share your thoughts on this and what solution should be preferred in a 
broader OpenStack's perspective.
This is a step in the process of having an automated diagnostic solution for 
OpenStack cluster.

[1] 
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/osprofiler/+spec/osprofiler-overhead-control
[2] 
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/osprofiler/+spec/tail-based-coherent-sampling
[3] 
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/osprofiler/+spec/asynchronous-trace-collection

Thanks
Rajul Kumar


__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: 
[email protected]?subject:unsubscribe<http://[email protected]?subject:unsubscribe>
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: 
[email protected]?subject:unsubscribe<http://[email protected]?subject:unsubscribe>
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: 
[email protected]?subject:unsubscribe<http://[email protected]?subject:unsubscribe>
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: 
[email protected]?subject:unsubscribe<http://[email protected]?subject:unsubscribe>
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Reply via email to