Recommandé
Recommandé
Contenu connexe
Tendances
Tendances (20)
En vedette
En vedette (10)
Similaire à JEEConf. Vanilla java
Similaire à JEEConf. Vanilla java (20)
Dernier
Dernier (20)
JEEConf. Vanilla java
- 1. Vanilla java or handling 10k req/sec per core
- 2. Dmitriy Dumanskiy Blynk Co-Founder / Java / Android Java blog : http://habrahabr.ru/users/doom369/topics DOU : http://dou.ua/users/DOOM/articles/
- 3. Experience mGage - 3k req/sec mobclix - 6k req/sec xxxx - 11k req/sec
- 4. Visa Load : ~2000 req/sec
- 5. Twitter : new tweets Load : ~6000 req/sec
- 6. Facebook messenger Load : 300k req/sec
- 8. IoT Market ● 4.4 billion devices right now (70$ b) ● 25 billion devices per 2020 (270$ b)
- 9. Makers problem + = ?
- 10. Problem ● Thousands of connections ● Keep-alive ● Security ● Pulling / polling ● Simplicity
- 11. IoT Protocols HTTP, MQTT, XMPP, AMQP, CoAP
- 13. Minimum packet size ● HTTP - 26 bytes (~70 bytes) ● MQTT - 2 bytes ● Blynk - 3 bytes
- 14. Blocking IO connection new Socket() new Thread() read / writeServer Socket
- 15. Blocking IO ● 256kb stack ● 1k threads == 250 MB of RAM ● Сontext switching
- 16. Non-Blocking new Socket() read / write Selector Thread new Socket() read / write new Socket() read / write
- 17. Non-Blocking ● Few threads. Usually - n cores x 2. ● No context switching ● No memory consumption
- 18. Non-blocking frameworks ● Apache MINA ● Grizzly ● Xnio ● Vert.x ● Akka ● Netty
- 19. Non-blocking frameworks ● Apache MINA ● Grizzly ● Xnio ● Vert.x ● Akka ● Netty
- 20. Non-blocking frameworks ● Apache MINA ● Grizzly ● Xnio ● Vert.x ● Akka ● Netty
- 21. Non-blocking frameworks ● Apache MINA ● Grizzly ● Xnio ● Vert.x ● Akka ● Netty
- 22. Non-blocking frameworks ● Apache MINA ● Grizzly ● Xnio ● Vert.x ● Akka ● Netty
- 23. Netty
- 24. Netty cons Netty is hard. 2-3 weeks onboarding
- 26. Netty cons Too many abstractions
- 27. Netty cons Easy shot in the foot
- 28. Netty cons ByteBuf in.readBytes(length) - memory leak in.readSlice(length) - ok
- 29. Netty cons Still has bugs, 300 issues
- 30. Netty pros Full control TCP_FASTOPEN, TCP_MD5SIG, TCP_CORK, TCP_KEEPCNT, TCP_KEEPIDLE, TCP_KEEPINTVL, SPLICE
- 31. Netty pros Supports everything TCP, UDP, UDT, SCTP, HTTP, HTTPS, HTTP/2, SPDY, Memcached, MQTT, etc
- 32. Netty pros A lot of default Handlers
- 33. Netty pros Fast
- 34. Netty pros Super quick community help
- 38. Blynk stats ● ~2000 of hardware always online ● ~300 users always online ● ~1000 local Blynk Server installations ● ~3 Mbps in traffic ● ~7 billions requests per month
- 39. Blynk load ● 6% CPU with 2500 req/sec on 4 cores ● 10k req/sec per core ● 90% of requests - 3 handlers ● Only 3% requests are HTTP
- 40. Why so fast?
- 41. No blocking IO Request BE Blocking IO Workers Response
- 43. What is your DB? try (Writer writer = Files.newBufferedWriter(file)) { writer.write(user.toString()); }
- 45. No synchronization Client 1 connect Selector Thread 1 assign Client 2 connect Selector Thread 2 assign Client 2 login Logic Thread 1 reregister
- 46. No GC pressure ctx.write(new Response(mId)); vs ByteBuf buf = ctx.alloc().directBuffer(1); buf.writeByte(mId); ctx.write(buf);
- 47. In memory Set<User> users = JsonParser.parseUsers(dir); + 1 min batches
- 48. Native transports ● Native epoll ● Native OpenSSL
- 51. Version 1. Tech stack ● Vanilla Java 8 ● Netty (HTTP, WebSockets, TCP/IP)
- 52. Version 1. Pros Simple single jar deployment java -jar server.jar 100ms start
- 53. Version 1. Pros Simple backup script
- 54. Version 1. Pros Single JVM, no cross-JVM shared state
- 55. Version 1. Pros Entry level
- 56. Version 1. Cons Single point of failure, single datacenter
- 57. Version 1. Cons Latency is bad for distant locations
- 58. Version 1. Cons Need to drop connections on redeploy
- 59. Version 2 Client Get DNS record EUROPE USA ASIA Geo DNS 50$
- 60. Version 2 ● Improved latency ● No common storage anymore
- 61. Version 2 USA Clients DC 1 EU Clients DC 2 ASIA Clients DC 3
- 63. Version 3. DB Cassandra Node 1 Node 3 Node 2 Node 3 Node 2 Node 1 Node 3 Node 2 DC 1 DC 2 Node 1 15$
- 64. Version 3. DB Cassandra ● No typical batches ● Minimum requirement 1GB of RAM ● Performs poorly on low-end VMs ● Much slower than Postgres
- 65. Version 3. Final USA Clients DC 1 EU Clients Postgres ASIA Clients DC 3 65$
- 66. Version 3. Final ● 60k req/sec for 65$ (25x for current load) ● + 10x growth to 20 CPU ● Samsung cloud - 1 req/sec per 6$
- 70. Q & A