• Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Register
    • Login

    Please Note This forum exists for community support for the Mango product family and the Radix IoT Platform. Although Radix IoT employees participate in this forum from time to time, there is no guarantee of a response to anything posted here, nor can Radix IoT, LLC guarantee the accuracy of any information expressed or conveyed. Specific project questions from customers with active support contracts are asked to send requests to support@radixiot.com.

    Radix IoT Website Mango 3 Documentation Website Mango 4 Documentation Website Mango 5 Documentation Website

    High CPU usage

    User help
    4
    32
    19.3k
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • B
      btrombo
      last edited by

      Just want to clarify that by process event handlers you are talking about an event detector that runs a local process or shell command? I have many event detectors that send emails if a data point is above or below a threshold but nothing that runs OS level commands.

      I received your email.

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • phildunlapP
        phildunlap
        last edited by

        Yes, you understood me correctly. How very interesting, then; I wonder how those child processes have come into being.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • B
          btrombo
          last edited by

          I found this on the thread monitoring, I'm assuming the high CPU time would relate to the two cores that are pinned. Not sure if this can help you diagnose the issues. I also emailed you the log files from the BACnet issue.

          0_1476904402601_upload-370c9e4c-3bb1-4df7-8f1a-3093c9a72952

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • phildunlapP
            phildunlap
            last edited by

            Interesting. That would suggest to me that main slowdown is writing out the data. So, a few questions,

            1. Do you have very many Meta points? If so, do any of them have multiple context updates from the same data source? This can produce a lot of extra load on the CPU, and while there are plans to mitigate this condition, it isn't currently available.
            2. What version of the MangoNoSql module do you have? If 1.2.3, what's db.nosql.shardStreamType set to in your env.properties file? (I'm guessing it's not there?)
            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • B
              btrombo
              last edited by

              1. I would say yes I have a lot of these(75ish without counting) and a bunch of them do use points from the same data source and set to update on context change.

              2. Yes 1.2.3, db.nosql.shardStreamType=INPUT_STREAM

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • JoelHaggarJ
                JoelHaggar
                last edited by

                Those meta data points could be causing your issues. Just go through them and make sure only 1 data point from the same data source is checked to do context update. One trick to do this is to export the JSON of the Meta Data Points and then go through it that way.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • phildunlapP
                  phildunlap
                  last edited by

                  Hi btrombo,

                  I just revisited your log files, and I noticed that across all 11 log files only 1 minute of time goes by, which means that error is pounding the log file. I suspect a considerable amount of the CPU is directed toward that error. If fixing the Meta points doesn't resolve it, try adding this category near the bottom of your Mango/class/log4j.xml (you will see others) and then reloading the log4j configuration using the Log4J Reset section of the system settings.

                  <category name="com.serotonin.bacnet4j.transport.DefaultTransport"><level value="fatal"/></category>
                  

                  This will prevent the ERROR level log messages you were getting from the DefaultTransport class from being logged.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • B
                    btrombo
                    last edited by

                    So this took a while but I did both of these and still a CPU core pinned. I'm going to double check the meta data points tomorrow as that was a lot to go through and might have missed some. Although I did get at least 95%+ of them there is no improvement, I'm not sure if one could cause this issue or if the CPU usage should have been progressively less as I changed them.

                    Those errors are no longer logging.

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • phildunlapP
                      phildunlap
                      last edited by phildunlap

                      You can verify that you've gotten all the Meta points by doing something like this in a python script. You may wish to go to your System Settings page and do a configuration backup just before running it, such that you know you have the latest JSON of your configuration.

                      import json
                      
                      configFile = open("/path/to/Mango/backup/Mango-Configuration.json")
                      config = json.load(configFile)
                      configFile.close()
                      
                      dpXidDict = {}
                      for dp in config["dataPoints"] :
                      	dpXidDict[dp["xid"]] = dp
                      	
                      for dp in config["dataPoints"] :
                      	#check if it's got a context, use that as the suggestion it's a meta point
                      	if "context" not in dp["pointLocator"] :
                      		continue
                      	countDict = {}
                      	for ctx in dp["pointLocator"]["context"] :
                      		if ctx["updateContext"] :
                      			dsXid = dpXidDict[ctx["dataPointXid"]]["dataSourceXid"]
                      			if dsXid not in countDict :
                      				countDict[dsXid] = 1
                      			else :
                      				countDict[dsXid] += 1
                      	found = False
                      	for dsXid in countDict :
                      		if countDict[dsXid] > 1 :
                      			found = True
                      			print "Found too many context updates from dataSource %s on data point: %s - %s   with XID: %s" % (dsXid, dp["deviceName"], dp["name"], dp["xid"])
                      	if found :
                      		print "\n"
                      

                      It should also be noted that you can probably cause this exact same issue by having different data sources updating the context, but with the same polling rate and quantize=true, but that multiple updates from the same data source is the main cause.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • B
                        btrombo
                        last edited by

                        I'm not sure if this has any help in trying to debug this but I noticed that I would get many alarms(timeouts, aborted polls) during the autobackup of the H2 Database Backup Settings.

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • B
                          btrombo
                          last edited by

                          Gone through all these options, but still a pinned core. I tried to clean a lot of stuff up in the system(unused sources and points), I purged a bunch of old event logs and such and the UI is much more responsive in combination with all the meta point changes. The memory usage does still creep up over time as well. Any more ideas?

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • phildunlapP
                            phildunlap
                            last edited by

                            One this that can give us a little more information is doing a thread dump, or a few, while you're observing the problem. I prefer the output from the Logging Console page, and typically I will grab 3-5 thread dumps that are a few seconds apart. You can email those into support@infiniteautomation.com and we'll take a look.

                            I wonder if when you observe this is when that TimeoutTask count is reliably large on the internal metric page? Also having an internal metric point tracking the available memory can help get a grasp on the frequency of the issue.

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • B
                              btrombo
                              last edited by

                              Hey thanks for the reply, I downloaded 5 dumps and emailed them in. I do have internal metrics for almost all the parameters available.
                              Here are two internal metric screenshots, I look at these often and they are stable as in I don't notice much change to either of these.

                              0_1478818536595_upload-58452cc5-90f4-44fe-8e6e-67480904fb47 0_1478818557900_upload-c3ce6a6a-4add-4158-9851-870b9bcdc904

                              Idle Memory:
                              0_1478818999560_upload-ba4f51d2-3320-4b52-93e5-7a6a843a82db

                              Virtual Memory:
                              0_1478819028518_upload-a310dad7-82ae-4b74-9029-bf0cfc7cfb8d

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • phildunlapP
                                phildunlap
                                last edited by phildunlap

                                Can you post a picture of your Mango NoSql settings section of the system settings page? From the threads you sent in (processed by a python script to make them more readable and sort them), this thread looks like the killer:

                                    @ ConcurrentHashMap.java:advance:3339
                                		CpuTime: 1809691511511583	UserTime: 1809333440000000	LogTime: 15	Thread: high-pool-1-thread-1666	ID: 1711
                                		--=====--=====--=====--=====--=====--=====--=====--=====--
                                	  java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap$Traverser:advance:3339
                                	  java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap$BaseIterator:<init>:3391
                                	  java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap$ValueIterator:<init>:3430
                                	  java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap$ValuesView:iterator:4683
                                	  com.infiniteautomation.nosql.MangoNoSqlBatchWriteBehind:execute:63
                                	  com.serotonin.m2m2.rt.maint.BackgroundProcessing$1:run:54
                                	  java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor:runWorker:1142
                                	  java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker:run:617
                                	  java.lang.Thread:run:745
                                ________________________________________________________________________________
                                	
                                    @ PlainDatagramSocketImpl.java:receive0:-2
                                		CpuTime: 413337358676	UserTime: 205690000000	LogTime: 11	Thread: BACnet4J IP socket listener	ID: 52
                                		--=====--=====--=====--=====--=====--=====--=====--=====--
                                	  java.net.PlainDatagramSocketImpl:receive0:-2
                                	  java.net.AbstractPlainDatagramSocketImpl:receive:143
                                	  java.net.DatagramSocket:receive:812
                                	  com.serotonin.bacnet4j.npdu.ip.IpNetwork:run:369
                                	  java.lang.Thread:run:745```
                                

                                It's taking four orders of magnitude more time than the next long running runnable thread! Holy cow! I would wonder how many data points you have ( SELECT count(id) FROM dataPoints; ) but it shouldn't matter, as I've seen that HashMap working quite fast with hundreds of thousands of points (it's likely that it's the writing data loop, not the HashMap, so maybe this task has just never gotten ahead of the incoming data, and thus never died). I would also wonder if there's anything interesting like scripting data sources enabling and disabling large amount of data points or a few data sources. But, that also seems unlikely.

                                I suppose I also wonder if your Meta points are constantly querying ranges of data. The recommendation for stream type that follows would a significant effect in massive querying. If you are doing something like...

                                return p.past(MINUTE).sum;
                                

                                you can potentially help Mango out by using some knowledge you have about that, with something like,

                                //Untested, replacement assuming a 2 second polling interval
                                var minuteAgo = new Date().getTime() - 60000;
                                var values = p.last(30);
                                
                                var sum = 0;
                                for( var k = 0; k < values.length; k+=1 ) {
                                   if( values[k].time > minuteAgo )
                                      sum += values[k].value;
                                }
                                return sum;
                                

                                as Mango will begin caching with the expectation of getting that value request (the last 30 values)

                                Another possibility is that a large number of threads used by BACnet is outcompeting this thread, and this thread isn't getting to run. We could test that by increasing the number of write behind threads in the No SQL settings on the system settings page (or lowering the points waiting spawn task threshhold if your point write threads is already > 1) such that more threads are trying to out-compete the BACnet threads for CPU time. But, I'm not sure that'll help the memory issue if you're not seeing the "Point values to be written" climbing. Your second internal metric page picture does have more values waiting and only 1 write thread. If you have liberty to play with the system some, I would try some settings like the following:

                                1. If this is a *nix, change db.shardStreamType to be db.shardStreamType=MAPPED_BYTE_BUFFER and use RANDOM_ACCESS_FILE if you are one Windows (MBB doesn't work on Windows yet, and I would expect MAPPED_BYTE_BUFFER to make a more significant impact than RAF, MBB is very fast). If your system is query heavy, this suggestion alone may make a huge difference. It would require a Mango restart to pick up the changed env.property
                                2. Lower the NoSQL setting (on the system settings) for "Batch write behind spawn threshold" to something pretty low, like 100 or 200 (not knowing your expected points/s it is difficult to guess confidently)
                                3. Raise the NoSQL setting for "Max batch write behind tasks" to 50 or so.

                                In most systems the most efficient number of write behind tasks is typically between 2-8 (displayed on the internal metric page as "Point value write threads" but I'm theorizing your optimal may fall between 30 and 50, so manipulate the spawn threshhold as such. Unfortunately, I am not overly confident in this being the solution, but it is something to try.

                                You may also consider disabling NoSQL backups (especially if you are not doing incremental backups, also in the NoSQL system settings section (I've seen massive databases take longer to finish a backup than it does for the next backup to start! And they were backing up the whole database every time!)).

                                I also wonder how many cores the computer running this has?

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • phildunlapP
                                  phildunlap
                                  last edited by phildunlap

                                  Nevermind the cores question, I see the answer in the first post. Also seeing that post again now, 16000 sounds like a gigantic threadpool. In your thread dumps, and 100 of both medium and low also seems very large. Medium and low are static pools, so that's incurring some overhead to keep those threads alive. About 250 threads, mostly from the low priority and medium priority pools, are just hanging out.

                                  I know BACnet can require a decent sized high priority pool, but I would perhaps try adjusting your threadpools as
                                  High priority = 20
                                  High priority max = 200-1000 (if you have experienced a problem with a lower cap that drove the cap so high, then do as is needed)
                                  Medium Priority = 4-8
                                  Low priority = 3

                                  Also, can you keep an eye out at your top for what Java process is consuming the CPU? In one of your pictures two java processes are consuming roughly equal CPU, and the forking is still mysterious to me, as you do not have process event handlers.

                                  I editted my last post to include some details about using Mango's caching to lighten the query load of Meta points, and some other things.

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • B
                                    btrombo
                                    last edited by

                                    I adjusted the core pool to your suggestion except high priority max I changed to 10000. My system is 95% BACnet thus a while ago we needed to increase it because of issues and we have not touched it since. Those pictures were using htop a standard top is attached.
                                    0_1479143095565_upload-10443284-fd3e-4512-9128-eec59047bfb6

                                    Here is the current NoSQL settings:
                                    0_1479143217656_upload-b7f1e1cd-e59f-46b9-8b4c-4b63bdf3af09

                                    There are no scripts enabling or disabling data sources or data points. I know that we do use similar to return p.past(MINUTE).sum; but I will have to look a little closer at what and when that is happening.

                                    I will try out some of your suggestions today and see if I can notice anything. Currently mango is running on a vmware server (ESXI) with about 7 other servers. The hardware of the server is an 8x2ghz cpu and mango has access to all 8 cores and 8GB of memory. The disks in the server I believe are Western digital red drives in a RAID configuration. The other 7 servers don’t use much of any of the resources (cpu time, disk access) most of the time. It is currently not an option to move mango to a dedicated server. It may be possible in the future but at this time I see no evidence of the other machines interfering with mango.

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • phildunlapP
                                      phildunlap
                                      last edited by phildunlap

                                      I agree, you shouldn't need to dedicate the server. I would expect using the MAPPED_BYTE_BUFFER to provide the most substantial benefit. You would need to restart after changing that. We should be doing a release this week that will include a new version of the NoSQL module that may help as well.

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • B
                                        btrombo
                                        last edited by

                                        I changed to MAPPED_BYTE_BUFFER and also tried the 200 and 50 settings. The 50 setting has no change that I could notice but changing it to 200 had even higher CPU usage. I put it at 500 and looks reasonable now. The core is no longer pinned and looks like the major issue has been resolved.

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • phildunlapP
                                          phildunlap
                                          last edited by

                                          Great! Thanks for your patience through the investigation and glad to hear it!

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • C
                                            craig
                                            last edited by

                                            what is the takeaway from this issue?

                                            On unix OS with a read heavy query load and lots of bacnet data sources use db.shardStreamType=MAPPED_BYTE_BUFFER and increase the "Batch write behind spawn threshold" to 500 and "Max batch write behind tasks" to 50?

                                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                            • First post
                                              Last post