Re: Flink RocksDB Performance

2021-07-20 Thread Robert Metzger
Your understanding of the problem is correct -- the serialization cost is the reason for the high CPU usage. What you can also try to optimize is the serializers you are using (by using data types that are efficient to serialize). See also this blog post: https://flink.apache.org/news/2020/04/15/f

Re: Flink RocksDB Performance

2021-07-16 Thread Vijay Bhaskar
Yes absolutely. Unless we need a very large state order of GB rocks DB is not required. RocksDB is good only because the Filesystem is very bad at LargeState. In other words FileSystem performs much better than RocksDB upto GB's. After that the file system degrades compared to RocksDB. Its not that

Re: Flink RocksDB Performance

2021-07-16 Thread Zakelly Lan
Hi Li Jim, Filesystem performs much better than rocksdb (by multiple times), but it is only suitable for small states. Rocksdb will consume more CPU on background tasks, cache management, serialization/deserialization and compression/decompression. In most cases, performance of the Rocksdb will mee

Flink RocksDB Performance

2021-07-16 Thread Li Jim
Hello everyone, I am using Flink 1.13.1 CEP Library and doing some pressure test. My message rate is about 16000 records per second. I find that it cant process more than 16000 records per second because the CPU cost is up to 100%(say 800% because I allocated 8 vcores to a taskmanager). I tried sw