Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Using different Java runtimes with OpenSearch. #670

Merged
merged 21 commits into from
Mar 29, 2022
Merged

Using different Java runtimes with OpenSearch. #670

merged 21 commits into from
Mar 29, 2022

Conversation

dblock
Copy link
Member

@dblock dblock commented Feb 8, 2022

Signed-off-by: dblock [email protected]

Description

A draft for a blog post to be published with 1.3.0 on Java Runtimes.

Requesting feedback and additions from @reta @smortex @dvenable @martin-gaievski and others.

Issues Resolved

#628

Check List

  • Commits are signed per the DCO using --signoff

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the BSD-3-Clause License.

This was referenced Feb 8, 2022
Closed
Closed
@dblock dblock force-pushed the java-628 branch 2 times, most recently from d0fd32e to 9e41bed Compare February 9, 2022 21:14
ryanbogan
ryanbogan reviewed Feb 9, 2022
View reviewed changes
_posts/2022-02-08-opensearch-java-runtime.markdown Outdated

### Benchmarking JDKs

TODO
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Benchmarking tests were run across JDK 8, 11, 14, 15, and 17 with both the x64 and arm versions of OpenSearch. Latency and throughput were the primary metrics recorded. JDK 17 consistently performed superior to the rest for both versions. JDK 15 was the closest to the metrics of JDK 17, followed by JDK 8 and 11. Meanwhile, JDK 14 was significantly slower than the other choices. Based on the results, JDK 17 is decisively the best option for running OpenSearch.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I've added almost as is and linked to OpenSearch#1276 for details.

Do you have a meaty example of how much better JDK 17 is? Something like "For example, searching through an index with XYZ data in such and such cluster reduced latency by X% and increased throughput by Z%."?

@muralikpbhat
Copy link

nice. Can we share more details on the tests with JDK17? Did it perform better irrespective GC type (CMS or G1)

dlvenable
dlvenable reviewed Feb 24, 2022
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@dlvenable dlvenable left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I made a few comments. I happened to come across this issue and noticed that you tagged dvenable in it. I assume you meant to tag me - @dlvenable .

_posts/2022-02-08-opensearch-java-runtime.markdown Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
_posts/2022-02-08-opensearch-java-runtime.markdown Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
_posts/2022-02-08-opensearch-java-runtime.markdown Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
_posts/2022-02-08-opensearch-java-runtime.markdown Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
_posts/2022-02-08-opensearch-java-runtime.markdown Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
_posts/2022-02-08-opensearch-java-runtime.markdown Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@stockholmux
Copy link
Member

@dblock How far out is this blog post?

@dblock dblock mentioned this pull request Mar 1, 2022
Closed
@dblock dblock mentioned this pull request Mar 17, 2022
Merged
1 task
@dblock dblock changed the title WIP: Using different Java runtimes with OpenSearch. Using different Java runtimes with OpenSearch. Mar 17, 2022
@dblock
Copy link
Member Author

dblock commented Mar 17, 2022

nice. Can we share more details on the tests with JDK17? Did it perform better irrespective GC type (CMS or G1)

@ryanbogan ^

@dblock dblock marked this pull request as ready for review March 17, 2022 16:30
@dblock dblock requested a review from a team as a code owner March 17, 2022 16:30
@dblock
Copy link
Member Author

dblock commented Mar 17, 2022

@stockholmux This is ready.

@stockholmux
Copy link
Member

Thanks @dblock I'll review. Next publish ideal date will be on Tuesday. Sound good?

@dblock
Copy link
Member Author

dblock commented Mar 17, 2022 •
edited
Loading

Thanks @dblock I'll review. Next publish ideal date will be on Tuesday. Sound good?

Sure. LMK if you want me to adjust the date in the filename and post.

Adjusted date to Monday.

@dblock dblock mentioned this pull request Mar 17, 2022
Closed
dlvenable
dlvenable previously approved these changes Mar 18, 2022
View reviewed changes
reta
reta previously approved these changes Mar 18, 2022
View reviewed changes
@stockholmux
Copy link
Member

@dblock Monday is a meh day for a blog post.

We may want to push it past the data prepper blog that just came in (#729).

dblock added 18 commits March 28, 2022 10:08
@dblock
Added note on defaulting to JAVA_HOME.
3648628 
Signed-off-by: dblock <[email protected]>
@dblock
Use present tense.
323148c 
Signed-off-by: dblock <[email protected]>
@dblock
Added benchmarking info.
fd4b07a 
Signed-off-by: dblock <[email protected]>
@dblock
Update following the downgrade to JDK 11 in v1.3.0.
ae93a0c 
Signed-off-by: dblock <[email protected]>
@dblock
Updated missing sections.
25994f3 
Signed-off-by: dblock <[email protected]>
@dblock
Clarified LTS.
69a8f24 
Signed-off-by: dblock <[email protected]>
@dblock
Collapsed table.
512008b 
Signed-off-by: dblock <[email protected]>
@dblock
Added a column on tested JDKs.
f29128c 
Signed-off-by: dblock <[email protected]>
@dblock
Fixed date.
6011dd6 
Signed-off-by: dblock <[email protected]>
@dblock
Last minute comments.
6e98463 
Signed-off-by: dblock <[email protected]>
@dblock
Updated to publish thursday, march 24.
c58b956 
Signed-off-by: dblock <[email protected]>
@dblock
Clarified that JDK is LTS, not OpenSearch.
e0ef88f 
Signed-off-by: dblock <[email protected]>
@dblock
Added smortex@.
cf579ac 
Signed-off-by: dblock <[email protected]>
@dblock
Added reta@.
5119cb4 
Signed-off-by: dblock <[email protected]>
@dblock
Added @ryanbogan.
bd901e4 
Signed-off-by: dblock <[email protected]>
@dblock
Addressed comments.
34d73de 
Signed-off-by: dblock <[email protected]>
@dblock
Reduce usage of we.
b6e7729 
Signed-off-by: dblock <[email protected]>
@dblock
Tuned up @smortex bio.
e3b4fee 
Signed-off-by: dblock <[email protected]>
@dblock
Copy link
Member Author

dblock commented Mar 28, 2022

@stockholmux Can we please ship this? Updated the date to today.

@dblock
Copy link
Member Author

dblock commented Mar 28, 2022

I was hoping to get community feedback for opensearch-project/opensearch-plugins#132 out of this, too.

@dblock dblock requested a review from stockholmux March 28, 2022 18:57
dimwetoth
dimwetoth approved these changes Mar 29, 2022
View reviewed changes
Copy link

@dimwetoth dimwetoth left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This looks complete and ready to publish. Apologies for the delay.

This was referenced Mar 29, 2022
Closed
Closed
peternied
peternied approved these changes Mar 29, 2022
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@peternied peternied left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Love me a technical blog post, nice work everyone

stockholmux
stockholmux approved these changes Mar 29, 2022
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@stockholmux stockholmux left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@stockholmux stockholmux merged commit ca71c4d into opensearch-project:main Mar 29, 2022
@stockholmux
Copy link
Member

Congrats, folks: https://opensearch.org/blog/technical-post/2022/03/opensearch-java-runtime/

@dblock dblock deleted the java-628 branch December 20, 2022 19:02
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@martin-gaievski martin-gaievski martin-gaievski left review comments

@jcgraybill jcgraybill jcgraybill left review comments

@ryanbogan ryanbogan ryanbogan left review comments

@smortex smortex smortex left review comments

@dimwetoth dimwetoth dimwetoth approved these changes

@peternied peternied peternied approved these changes

@stockholmux stockholmux stockholmux approved these changes

@reta reta reta left review comments

@dlvenable dlvenable dlvenable left review comments

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.