We are migrating our database from SQL Server 2012 to Amazon Redshift.
The front end of our application is developed in MicroStrategy (MSTR) which fires the queries on Redshift.
Although the application is working fine in Production (on SQL Server 2012), we have run into a strange issue in our PoC Environment on Redshift.
When we kicked off a dashboard in MSTR, the query from the dashboard hits Redshift and it completes successfully without any issues.
But when we stress test the application by running all the dashboards simultaneously, then that particular dashboard's query terminates in Redshift. The database does not throw any error message which is why we cannot troubleshoot why the query is terminating.
Can anyone please suggest how we should go about solving this problem.
Thank you
The problem might be that you have some timeout on the queue that you are sending the query using WLM configuration.
Redshift is designed differently from other DB, to be optimized for Analytical queries. For that reason it doesn't cache queries results, as you would do with OLTP DB. The other difference is that you have a predefined concurrently level (also part of WLM - http://docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift/latest/mgmt/workload-mgmt-config.html). Each concurrency slot will have its allocated resources to complete big queries quickly, but it is limiting the number of concurrent queries that can run. The default configuration is 5, and you can increase it up to 50. The recommendation is to have it increased to not more than 15-20, as with 50, it means that each query is getting only 2% of the cluster resource instead of 20% (with 5) or 5% (with 20).
The combination of these two differences is: if you are connecting many dashboards, each one sends its queries to Redshift, competes over the resources (without caching each query will run again and again), and might timeout or just be too slow for an interactive dashboard.
Please make sure that you are using the Redshift optimized drivers for MicroStrategy, which are sending queries to Redshift under the above assumptions.
You can also consider putting some RDS between your dashboards and Redshift, with the aggregation data that you need for your dashboards, and that can use in-memory caching and higher concurrency on that summary data. You can see an interesting pattern that you can implement with pg-bouncer see here, that can help you send some queries (the analytical ones) to Redshift, and some (the aggregated dashboard ones) to a PostgreSQL one.
Related
I have a Singlestore (previously MemSQL) cloud database set up.
My software is running in the background, constantly writing to a table.
When I try to query this table, it takes 10+ seconds. When the software is shut off, the query takes milliseconds.
What would be the reason for this? And is there anything that can be done to mitigate against this?
From a high level, cluster resources are much more utilized while the background software constantly writes to the table. The same resources that handle the constant writes are concurrently trying to serve the query, so it makes sense its faster when there is no writing.
A 'knob to turn' WRT database ingest performance is partition count - you can try creating a test DB w/ more partitions that the current DB (say 2x more). Then try querying from the test DB, both while the background software is running and while it is not - compare this to the DB w/ fewer partitions.
For general guidance on troubleshooting query performance, see this section of the docs: https://docs.singlestore.com/managed-service/en/query-data/query-procedures/troubleshooting-poorly-performing-queries.html
If you're an active customer, you can file a support ticket for the issue for some additional analysis of the backend workings
Currently, I encounter an issue of suspended queries in Azure Synapse when executing from ADF (Store procedures call).
Also, I followed the suggestion in the link below for troubleshooting the issue:
Delete due to sensitive informations
The troubleshoot queries returned as below:
I checked if the transaction lock is the issue as I killed a few suspending or running queries which they ran for more than 15 hours. I also checked for the rest of the queries running but there is nothing would cause the transaction lock. I tried to run the store procedure manually from Azure Data Studio which is blocked as mentioned above and It took 40 seconds to complete.
While the suspending query from ADF, it took nearly an hour to finish.
Any suggestion to troubleshoot this issue is much appreciated.
Thanks
There a number of factors you must always consider when tuning queries in Azure Synapse Analytics, dedicated SQL pools:
DWU - what DWU is your pool at? Lower DWUs mean lower concurrent users and lower performance and should not be used for any kind of performance tuning. Crank it up temporarily to rule this out as a problem, bearing in mind changing this disconnects any active queries. Also bear in mind, not all queries respond to higher DWU.
Resource class - what resource class is associated with the user executing these queries? Remember the default is smallrc, and the admin user always has smallrc. Understand static and dynamic resource classes. DMV sys.dm_pdw_exec_requests will give you useful information on this. Trial with your workload to find the sweetspot between performance and concurrency v resource class. Encourage your dev team to use labels in their queries: OPTION ( LABEL = 'some informative label' )
Table geometry - this is the distribution (ROUND_ROBIN|HASH|REPLICATE) of your table and the indexing choice (CLUSTERED COLUMNSTORE|CLUSTERED INDEX|HEAP). Clustered columnstore and round robin are the defaults but they are not always appropriate. Consider what is appropriate for your tables.
If you work through those and still have an issue you can start to look at statistics and workload classification for starters, but gather information on the points above should give you a good idea.
If you are just doing single value INSERTs, then don't. Dedicated SQL pools are terrible with these. Convert these to load from a file in a single INSERT / COPY INTO.
I had to switch an enterprise Django 1.11 site from a corporate-hosted PostgreSQL 9.4 server to AWS RDS Aurora-PostgreSQL 10 cluster. My initial impression was that it should be a straightforward migration, as I was not using any version-specific code.
Immediately after migration, the site started breaking down horribly. Queries that used to take milliseconds suddenly jumped to 100x the time, causing timeouts all over gunicorn threads. I also kept seeing connections being dropped from both RDS and Django.
It kept appearing as if it would be some setting I need to match between previous server and current server, but despite engaging PostgreSQL experts and AWS support, there were no simple answers (or even complex ones). I finally had to fine-tune most queries in my Django code to bring stability to the site.
The app has several queries that refer to foreign relationships, so I used a number of prefetch_related and similar tricks to fix the slowdown. So, a query that was taking 0.5 seconds went to 80 seconds, and after I added prefetch_related, went back to 0.5 seconds.
Even though the site is now stable, I am posting this in the hope that some PostgreSQL and/or Django expert sees this and recognizes this as a symptom of some wrong setting. I am not in a position to share sample queries and am not asking for query optimization. The question is: what would cause a query to become 100x slower when we move from one PostgreSQL server to another, with no change in application code?
In general, postgres-compatible aurora has wildly different performance characteristics than vanilla postgres, and the configuration and tuning for both can be very different. The easiest path forward for you would have been for you to have used AWS RDS for Postgres and not AWS RDS with Aurora Postgres if you had wanted to get performance characteristics that were close to your self-hosted postgres. There are a number of configuration details that you didn't share that would affect performance between RDS and a self-hosted server including VPC settings, SSL, etc. that could also affect performance.
I am just starting with biquery, my DB is small (10K of rows 1 table) and my queries are simple count and group by.
Its takes and average of 3-4 sec per request but sometimes its jumps to 10 and event 15sec
I am querying from amazon linux server in Irland using the BQ tool.
Is it possible to get results faster (under 1sec) so I will be able to present my webpages faster.
1) Big Query is a highly scalable database, before being a "super fast" database. It's designed to process HUGE amount of data distributing the processing among several different machines using a technique named Dremel. Because it's designed to use several machines and parallel processing, you should expect to have super-scalability with a good performance.
2) BigQuery is an asset when you want to analyze billions of rows.
For example: analyzing all the wikipedia revisions in 5-10 seconds isn't bad, is it? But even a much smaller table would take about the same time, even if has 10k rows.
3) Under this size, you'll be better off using more traditional data storage solutions such as Cloud SQL or the App Engine Datastore. If you want to keep SQL capability, Cloud SQL is the best guess.
Sybase IQ is often installed in a single database and it doesn't use Dremel. That said, it's going to be faster than Big Query in many scenarios...as designed.
4) Certainly the performance differ from a dedicated environment. You get your dedicated environment for 20K$ a month.
That's the expected behaviour. In BigQuery you are using a shared infrastructure, so depending on the use at the moment you will get better or worse response time. Actually batch queries (those not needing interactivity) are encouraged and rewarded by not adding up to your quota.
You typically don't use BigQuery as your main database to show data in your web application. Depending on what you want to do, BigQuery can be a Big Data storage and you should have another intermediate store where you could store computed results to display to your users. Or maybe in your use case you don't really need BigQuery and there is a better solution.
In any case, you are not going to be able to avoid a few seconds wait (even if you go Premium, you get more guarantees about the service, but in no case a service fast enough as to be your main backend for a webapp)
My Task is
1) Initially I want to import the data from MS SQL Server into HDFS using SQOOP.
2) Through Hive I am processing the data and generating the result in one table
3) That result containing table from Hive is again exported to MS SQL SERVER back.
I want to perform all this using Amazon Elastic Map Reduce.
The data which I am importing from MS SQL Server is very large (near about 5,00,000 entries in one table. Like wise I have 30 tables). For this I have written a task in Hive which contains only queries (And each query has used a lot of joins in it). So due to this the performance is very poor on my single local machine ( It takes near about 3 hrs to execute completely).
I want to reduce that time as much less as possible. For that we have decided to use Amazon Elastic Mapreduce. Currently I am using 3 m1.large instance and still I have same performance as on my local machine.
In order to improve the performance what number of instances should I need to use?
As number of instances we use are they configured automatically or do I need to specify while submitting JAR to it for execution? Because as I use two machine time is same.
And also Is there any other way to improve the performance or just to increase the number of instance. Or am I doing something wrong while executing JAR?
Please guide me through this as I don't much about the Amazon Servers.
Thanks.
You could try Ganglia, which can be installed on your EMR cluster using a bootstrap action. This will give you some metrics on the performance of each node in the cluster and may help you optimise to get the right sized cluster:
http://docs.amazonwebservices.com/ElasticMapReduce/latest/DeveloperGuide/UsingEMR_Ganglia.html
If you use the EMR Ruby client on your local machine, you can set up an SSH tunnel to allow you to view the ganglia web interface in Firefox (you'll also need to setup FoxyProxy as per the following http://docs.amazonwebservices.com/ElasticMapReduce/latest/DeveloperGuide/emr-connect-master-node-foxy-proxy.html)