1. 0.5 mln packets per second with Erlang
Nov 22, 2014
Maxim Kharchenko
CTO/Cloudozer LLP
2. The road map
• Erlang on Xen intro
• LINCX project overview
• Speed-related notes
– Arguments are registers
– ETS tables are (mostly) ok
– Do not overuse records
– GC is key to speed
– gen_server vs. barebone process
– NIFS: more pain than gain
– Fast counters
– Static compiler?
• Q&A
3. Erlang on Xen a.k.a. LING
• A new Erlang platform that runs without OS
• Conceived in 2009
• Highly-compatible with Erlang/OTP
• Built from scratch, not a “port”
• Optimized for low startup latency
• Open sourced in 2014 (github.com/cloudozer/ling)
• Local and remote builds
Go to erlangonxen.org
5. The road map
• Erlang on Xen intro
• LINCX project overview
• Speed-related notes
– Arguments are registers
– ETS tables are (mostly) ok
– Do not overuse records
– GC is key to speed
– gen_server vs. barebone process
– NIFS: more pain than gain
– Fast counters
– Static compiler?
• Q&A
6. LINCX: project overview
• Started in December, 2013
• Initial scope = porting LINC-Switch to LING
• High degree of compatibility demonstrated for LING
• Extended scope = fix LINC-Switch fast path
• Beta version of LINCX open sourced on March 3, 2014
• LINCX runs 100x faster than the old code
LINCX repository:
github.com/FlowForwarding/lincx
7. Raw network interfaces in Erlang
• LING adds raw network interfaces:
Port = net_vif:open(“eth1”, []),
port_command(Port, <<1,2,3>>),
receive
{Port,{data,Frame}} > ‐
...
• Raw interface receives whole Ethernet frames
• LINCX uses standard gen_tcp for the control connection and net_vif -
for data ports
• Raw interfaces support mailbox_limit option - packets get dropped if
the mailbox of the receiving process overflows:
Port = net_vif:open(“eth1”, [{mailbox_limit,16384}]),
...
8. Testbed configuration
* Test traffic goes between vm1 and vm2
* LINCX runs as a separate Xen domain
* Virtual interfaces are bridged in Dom0
10. Processing delay and low-level stats
• LING can measure a processing delay for a packet:
1> ling:experimental(processing_delay, []).
Processing delay statistics:
Packets: 2000 Delay: 1.342us +‐ 0.143 (95%)
• LING can collect low-level stats for a network interface:
1> ling:experimental(llstat, 1). %% stop/display
Duration: 4868.6ms
RX: interrupts: 69170 (0 kicks 0.0%) (freq 14207.4/s period 70.4us)
RX: reqs per int: 0/0.0/0
RX: tx buf freed per int: 0/8.5/234
TX: outputs: 1479707 (112263 kicks 7.6) (freq 303928.8/s period 3.3us)
TX: tx buf freed per int: 0/0.6/113
TX: rates: 303.9kpps 3622.66Mbps avg pkt size 1489.9B
TX: drops: 12392 (freq 2545.3/s period 392.9us)
TX: drop rates: 2.5kpps 30.26Mbps avg pkt size 1486.0B
11. The road map
• Erlang on Xen intro
• LINCX project overview
• Speed-related notes
– Arguments are registers
– ETS tables are (mostly) ok
– Do not overuse records
– GC is key to speed
– gen_server vs. barebone process
– NIFS: more pain than gain
– Fast counters
– Static compiler?
• Q&A
12. Arguments are registers
animal(batman = Cat, Dog, Horse, Pig, Cow, State) > ‐
feed(Cat, Dog, Horse, Pig, Cow, State);
animal(Cat, deli = Dog, Horse, Pig, Cow, State) > ‐
pet(Cat, Dog, Horse, Pig, Cow, State);
...
• Many arguments do not make a function any slower
• But do not reshuffle arguments:
%% SLOW
animal(batman = Cat, Dog, Horse, Pig, Cow, State) > ‐
feed(Goat, Cat, Dog, Horse, Pig, Cow, State);
...
13. ETS tables are (mostly) ok
• A small ETS table lookup = 10x function activations
• Do not use ets:tab2list() inside tight loops
• Treat ETS as a database; not a pool of global variables
• 1-2 ETS lookups on the fast path are ok
• Beware that ets:lookup(), etc create a copy of the data on the heap of
the caller, similarly to message passing
14. Do not overuse records
• selelement() creates a copy of the tuple
• State#state{foo=Foo1,bar=Bar1,baz=Baz1} creates 3(?)
copies of the tuple
• Use tuples explicitly in performance-critical sections to control
the heap footprint of the code:
%% from 9p.erl
mixer({rauth,_,_}, {tauth,_,Afid,_,_}, _) ‐> {write_auth,AFid};
mixer({rauth,_,_}, {tauth,_,Afid,_,_,_}, _) ‐> {write_auth,AFid};
mixer({rwrite,_,_}, _, initial) ‐> start_attaching;
mixer({rerror,_,_}, _, initial) ‐> auth_failed;
mixer({rlerror,_,_}, _, initial) ‐> auth_failed;
mixer({rattach,_,Qid}, {tattach,_,Fid,_,_,Aname,_}, initial) > ‐
{attach_more,Fid,AName,qid_type(Qid)};
mixer({rclunk,_}, {tclunk,_,Fid}, initial) ‐> {forget,Fid};
15. Garbage collection is key to speed
• Heap is a list of chunks
• 'new heap' is close to its head, 'old heap' - to its tail
proc_t
• A GC run takes 10μs on average
• GC may run 1000s times per second
HTOP
...
16. How to tackle GC-related issues
• (Priority 1) Call erlang:garbage_collect() at strategic points
• (Priority 2) For the fastest code avoid GC completely – restart the fast
process regularly:
spawn(F, [{suppress_gc,true}]), %% LING ‐only
• (Priority 3) Use fullsweep_after option
17. gen_server vs barebone process
• Message passing using gen_server:call() is 2x slower than Pid ! Msg
• For speedy code prefer barebone processes to gen_servers
• Design Principles are about high availability, not high performance
18. NIFs: more pain than gain
• A new principle of Erlang development: do not use NIFs
• For a small performance boost, NIFs undermine key properties of
Erlang: reliability and soft-realtime guarantees
• Most of the time Erlang code can be made as fast as C
• Most of performance problems of Erlang are traceable to NIFs, or
external C libraries, which are similar
• Erlang on Xen does not have NIFs and we do not plan to add them
19. Fast counters
• 32-bit or 64-bit unsigned integer counters with overflow - trivial in C,
not easy in Erlang
• FIXNUMs are signed 29-bit integers, BIGNUMs consume heap and are
10-100x slower
• Use two variables for a counter?
foo(C1, 16#ffffff, ...) -> foo(C1+1, 0, ...);
foo(C1, C2, ...) ‐ > foo(C1, C2+1, ...);
...
• LING has a new experimental feature – fast counters:
erlang:new_counter(Bits) ‐ > Ref
erlang:increment_counter(Ref, Incr)
erlang:read_counter(Ref)
erlang:release_counter(Ref)
20. Future: static compiler for Erlang
• Scalars and algebraic types
• Structural types only – no nominal types
• Target compiler efficiency not static type checking
• A middle ground between:
• “Type is a first class citizen” (Haskell)
• “A single type is good enough” (Python, Erlang)
21. Future: static compiler for Erlang - 2
• Challenges:
• Pattern matching compilation
• Type inference for recursive types
y = {(unit | y), x, (unit | y)}
y = nil | {x, y}
• Work started in 2013
• Currently the compiler is at the proof-of-concept stage
