-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 17.7k
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.
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
runtime/pprof: labels are not added to profiles #23458
Comments
I believe currently only CPU profile utilizes tag information.
pprof code for goroutine profile (https://golang.org/src/runtime/pprof/pprof.go?s=6343:6376#L599) depends on runtime.GoroutineProfile, and that runtime function doesn't handle tags. But I agree that it would be nice if profiles other than CPU profile can generate tagged profile samples. |
Thank you, @hyangah. It would have helped me if the documentation for pprof labels had noted this. Can I ask for that change to the documentation? If it'll help, I'm happy to draft it. I think that I would find tags helpful in heap and goroutine profiles. If there is someone who would lend some guidance, I may be able to make time to work on the changes to add this. How does this sound and is anyone interested enough to discuss the high level changes and review the work? |
@ccfrost Who will not love well-written documentation. Send a CL! I don't think it's too hard to extend the goroutine profile to include the labels. Probably not difficult for any custom pprof.Profile (returned from pprof.NewProfile) that reports the 'current' status either. But I am afraid it's challenging to extend profiles such as heap, block, or mutex because they involve never decremented counters (e.g. heap profile's data to support --alloc_* options). @rsc and @aclements , what do you think about adding tags to other profile types? |
CC @matloob |
Hi Chris! I agree labels would be good to add to "bounded" profiles. Unfortunately, most of the profile types are "monotonic", so we'd have to hold on to labels created from the beginning of the program. Even the @matloob, I remember there was some question about whether/how C++ pprof handles this for heap profiles. Did we ever figure out the answer? |
Does runtime keep track of the labels at the time of the object allocation already? An object can be freed by a different goroutine so the labels for the profiled block should be stored somewhere for use in free. When using the experimental api in cl/102755 (background profiling support), we kept track of a mapping from a profiled block to the labels when the object was created in a user space. One drawback is that, if the reader is slow so a record gets lost due to the overflow, that will lead a leak in the map. If the runtime actively maintains the mapping, the experimental api can be changed to take advantage of it. |
It doesn't currently. Right now, we just have a hash table from allocation stack to bucket+memRecord, and profiled allocations have a link to the right bucket. The memRecord is just a few cumulative stats. Adding labels would probably require adding a second level to the memRecord that mapped from label set to per-label-set stats. Alternatively, we could key the main hash table by both stack and label set, but then it's unclear how to clean things out of that hash table when the last object when a given label set has been freed.
Yes, if the runtime was tracking the label set it could be reported on both the alloc and the free. But isn't there a more fundamental problem here? With a log-based heap profile, if you drop records, won't that permanently skew the profile? Unlike a CPU profile, a log-based heap profile needs to match up the allocation and free records; it's okay to lose both, but not one or the other. I would think the system would have to guarantee that it can report the free record if it reports the allocation record, for example, by chaining overflow free records through the heap specials until the reader catches up. (FWIW, I'm a big fan of log-based profiling systems because it gets aggregation out of the runtime, which both simplifies the runtime and makes it possible to plug in more sophisticated aggregation. This is something I think Linux perf got really right.) |
The first one (two levels memRecord) seems more feasible and simpler for mPtog_Flush*.
Agree the runtime must not drop the free records of sampled allocations. Regarding the log-based heap profile: inspired by cl/102755, I experimented to generate labeled heap profiles using it, but encountered a couple of challenges, in addition to dealing with the dropped free event records.
|
That's true, though this can always happen because it's statistical anyway (albeit more likely to sample large objects). Overflow allocation records could also be threaded through the heap specials.
If there's a canonical log reader (say, in runtime/pprof), we can always special-case this. If there isn't, then things get trickier. One could imagine feeding in synthetic records for the current state of the heap. Obviously you'd miss out on objects that had already been freed before starting the log reader, but you wouldn't miss out on long-lived objects that had already been allocated.
Yes. It seems quite reasonable to feed GC records into the log, and that should make it possible to implement the 3 stage algorithm. |
I spent half an hour today wondering what I was doing wrong since my tags/labels were not showing up in my profiles. |
Change https://golang.org/cl/131275 mentions this issue: |
Currently only CPU profile utilizes tag information. This change documents that fact Updates #23458 Change-Id: Ic893e85f63af0da9100d8cba7d3328c294e8c810 GitHub-Last-Rev: be99a12 GitHub-Pull-Request: #27198 Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/131275 Reviewed-by: Hyang-Ah Hana Kim <[email protected]>
Change https://golang.org/cl/189317 mentions this issue: |
Change https://golang.org/cl/189318 mentions this issue: |
Document goroutine label inheritance. Goroutine labels are copied upon goroutine creation and there is a test enforcing this, but it was not mentioned in the docstrings for `Do` or `SetGoroutineLabels`. Add notes to both of those functions' docstrings so it's clear that one does not need to set labels as soon as a new goroutine is spawned if they want to propagate tags. Updates #32223 Updates #23458 Change-Id: Idfa33031af0104b884b03ca855ac82b98500c8b4 Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/189317 Reviewed-by: Ian Lance Taylor <[email protected]>
Will this be merged soon? |
@ianlancetaylor @andybons - any chance we could revive the CR above that adds labels to goroutine profiles? I have an annoying goroutine leak that I'm debugging, for which this would be absolutely invaluable! |
I'm not sure I understand that CL. Does "go tool pprof" understand the labels that it emits? I don't see the code for that, but I could easily be missing it. CC @martisch who has looked at some of this code. |
Scanning through the CL and surrounding code, it appears to add labels to Looking through the google/pprof library, it appears to have had support for labels since it's OSS release (i.e. here they are in profile.go#L75). Also, I know that labels are displayed in Also, since |
Thanks. Can you point me to the code where the |
@ianlancetaylor So I don't believe anything actually parses the |
I.e. |
Thanks. |
go tool pprof imports https://github.com/google/pprof These samples in proto profile format generally allow labels: The parsing happens with proto unmarshalling: link The sample struct in go then contains Labels: [link] (https://github.com/google/pprof/blob/d6d2dc122c202476d1eacc56b587de6a95d4fae5/profile/profile.go#L72) "labels: " seems to be used to construct a key to count profiles here So I would agree with @jared2501 that the "labels: " part isnt parsed but purely for debug output and generating unique keys for grouping of samples with the same labels. |
Hmm, it seems that I forgot to subscribe to this issue before sending out the CL under discussion. Now I know why my CL (https://golang.org/cl/189318) suddenly woke up last week. :) Anyway, The assessment of the I generally consume goroutine dumps in text form, so having labels there is rather useful, IMO. Based on @hyangah's comments, it looks like the CL will be submitted soon if no one voices strong objections. |
Goroutines are directly associated with labels. It's relatively easy to plumb those through without creating goroutine-locals in the wild. This is accomplished by splitting out most of the code from the public `runtime.GoroutineProfile` into a new unexported `runtime.goroutineProfileWithLabels`, which then has a thin wrapper linked into the `runtime/pprof` package as `runtime_goroutineProfileWithLabels`. (mirroring the way labels get associated with the `g` for a goroutine in the first place) Per-#6104, OS-thread creation profiles are a bit useless, as `M`s tend to be created be created by a background goroutine. As such, I decided not to add support for capturing the labels at `M`-creation-time, since the stack-traces seem to always come out `nil` for my simple test binaries. This change currently provides labels for debug=0 and debug=1, as debug=2 is currently entirely generated by the runtime package and I don't see a clean way of getting the `labelMap` type handled properly within the `runtime` package. Update the comment added in cl/131275 to mention goroutine support for labels. Updates #23458 Change-Id: Ia4b558893d7d10156b77121cd9b70c4ccd9e1889 Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/189318 Reviewed-by: Hyang-Ah Hana Kim <[email protected]>
Super cool to see this merge! Thanks everyone for the work on it :) |
My next FR in this area would be to get the labels into the goroutines |
I wanted to add them to the
38c2c12 was the low-hanging fruit of plumbing. |
Can we split this into (at least) a couple of sub issues?
|
@hyangah thanks for enumerating the topics being discussed here. WRT goroutine profiles with |
Background profiling is an experimental patch that was floated as a way to get granular CPU usage information in golang/go#23458. I decided to dust off the Golang patch that implements this (https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/102755) and see for myself what you actually get. The output is something like this: ``` bgprof_test.go:51: ts: 12h37m15.540022251s labels: map[foo:bar] fn: hash/crc32.ieeeCLMUL bgprof_test.go:51: ts: 12h37m15.54801909s labels: map[foo:bar] fn: hash/crc32.ieeeCLMUL bgprof_test.go:51: ts: 12h37m15.560015269s labels: map[foo:bar] fn: hash/crc32.ieeeCLMUL bgprof_test.go:51: ts: 12h37m15.568026639s labels: map[foo:bar] fn: hash/crc32.ieeeCLMUL bgprof_test.go:51: ts: 12h37m15.580029608s labels: map[foo:bar] fn: hash/crc32.ieeeCLMUL ... ``` If we used profiler labels to identify queries (similar to what's shown in cockroachdb#60508) I guess I can see how you can somehow build a profile from this stream and then use the tag breakdown of the profile to reason about CPU allocated to each query. It seems wildly experimental and also unergonomical, though. It seems like we'd get maybe roughly the same, without as much bending over backwards and wildly experimental bleeding edge, by relying on periodic foreground sampling at a lower frequency (`runtime.SetCPUProfileRate`) than the default 100hz. To run this PR (which you shouldn't need to do for anything, but still) you'd clone `cockroachdb/go`, check out the [bgprof] branch, run `./make.bash` in `src` and change your PATH so that `$(which go)` is `bin/go`. Release note: None
What version of Go are you using (
go version
)?I have tested on:
go version go1.9.2 darwin/amd64
go version go1.9.2 linux/amd64
Does this issue reproduce with the latest release?
Yes.
What operating system and processor architecture are you using (
go env
)?darwin: GOARCH=amd64 GOOS=darwin
linux: GOARCH=amd64 GOOS=linux
What did you do?
pprof labels that I add using pprof.Do() do not appear in the goroutine profile.
Steps:
I also downloaded the file "localhost:5555/debug/pprof/goroutine"", gunzipped that file, and did not see either the label key nor value in the protobuf file.
When I run "go tool pprof localhost:5555/debug/pprof/goroutine" twice and in the second run run "tags", I see
This shows that labels can work. (I expect no output on the first run, since it is reasonable for no heap memory to have been allocated.)
What did you expect to see?
I expect to see the tags command output the label key-value pair in the program.
What did you see instead?
The tags command reports an empty value:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: