Download as PDF, PPTX
![State-based G-Counter (grow only)
(Vector-based approach)
Data
Integer V[] / one element per replica set
Init
V ≔ [0, 0, ... , 0]
Query
return ∑i V[i]
Update
increment(): V[i] ≔ V[i] + 1 / i is replica set number
Merge(V‘)
∀i ∈ [0, n-1] : V[i] ≔ max(V[i], V‘[i])](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/nostresswithstate-140513051320-phpapp02/85/No-stress-with-state-47-320.jpg)
![State-based G-Counter (grow only)
(Vector-based approach)
R1
R3
R2
V = [1, 0, 0]
U
V = [0, 0, 0]
I
I
I
V = [0, 0, 0]
V = [0, 0, 0]
U
V = [0, 0, 1]
M
V = [1, 0, 0]
M
V = [1, 0, 1]](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/nostresswithstate-140513051320-phpapp02/85/No-stress-with-state-48-320.jpg)
![State-based PN-Counter (pos./neg.)
• Simple vector approach as with G-Counter does not work
• Violates monotonicity requirement of semilattice
• Need to use two vectors
• Vector P to track incements
• Vector N to track decrements
• Query result is ∑i P[i] – N[i]](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/nostresswithstate-140513051320-phpapp02/85/No-stress-with-state-49-320.jpg)
![State-based PN-Counter (pos./neg.)
Data
Integer P[], N[] / one element per replica set
Init
P ≔ [0, 0, ... , 0], N ≔ [0, 0, ... , 0]
Query
Return ∑i P[i] – N[i]
Update
increment(): P[i] ≔ P[i] + 1 / i is replica set number
decrement(): N[i] ≔ N[i] + 1 / i is replica set number
Merge(P‘, N‘)
∀i ∈ [0, n-1] : P[i] ≔ max(P[i], P‘[i])
∀i ∈ [0, n-1] : N[i] ≔ max(N[i], N‘[i])](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/nostresswithstate-140513051320-phpapp02/85/No-stress-with-state-50-320.jpg)
![Non-negative Counter
Problem: How to check a global invariant with local information only?
• Approach 1: Only dec if local state is > 0
• Concurrent decs could still lead to negative value
• Approach 2: Externalize negative values as 0
• inc(negative value) == noop(), violates counter semantics
• Approach 3: Local invariant – only allow dec if P[i] - N[i] > 0
• Works, but may be too strong limitation
• Approach 4: Synchronize
• Works, but violates assumptions and prerequisites of CRDTs](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/nostresswithstate-140513051320-phpapp02/85/No-stress-with-state-51-320.jpg)
Uploaded byUwe Friedrichsen
No stress with state
The document discusses the challenges of building scalable applications, emphasizing the need to manage state effectively to enable easier scaling and distribution. It outlines strategies to move state to front-end or back-end systems, utilizing caching and shared session states to maintain performance during scaling. Lastly, it introduces conflict-free replicated data types (CRDTs) as a solution for managing state in distributed systems while addressing consistency challenges.
More Related Content
No stress with state
- 1. No stress withstate Hands-on tips for scalable applications Uwe Friedrichsen, codecentric AG, 2014
- 2. @ufried Uwe Friedrichsen |uwe.friedrichsen@codecentric.de | http://slideshare.net/ufried | http://ufried.tumblr.com
- 3. A word aboutscalability ...
- 4. Your system isonly scalable if you can easily scale up and down
- 5. State in scalablesystems
- 6. State is theenemy of scalable applications
- 7. State … • …avoids load distribution • … requires replication • … makes systems brittle • … makes scaling down hard
- 8. General design rule • Move state either to the frontend and/or to the backend • Make everything else stateless • Use caches if that’s too slow (but be aware of their tradeoffs) Frontend Client Backend Store Application Stateful Stateful Stateless
- 9. Frontend client stateexamples • Cookies (fondly handcrafted) • Play framework • JavaScript client • HTML5 storage
- 10. And what ifwe are bound to a web framework that heavily uses session state?
- 11. Standard session statehandling • Sticky Sessions • Session Replication
- 12. Sticky Sessions Load Balancer Session Node 4711 2 0815 4 … … Session: 4711 Node: 2
- 13. Sticky Sessions Load Balancer Session Node 4711 2 0815 4 … … Session: 4711 Problem: Node is down ✖ New Node: 4 Node 4 does not know session 4711
- 14. Sticky Sessions Load Balancer Session Node 4711 2 0815 4 … … Problem: Load is unequally distributed
- 15. Sticky Sessions Load Balancer Session Node 4711 2 0815 4 … … Problem: Scale down #Sessions: 1 #Sessions: 1 #Sessions: 1 #Sessions: 1 #Sessions: 1 Cannot shut down node without losing session
- 16.
- 17. But what ifwe really need to scale?
- 18. Lazy session replication leavesyou with inconsistencies Load Balancer Eager session replication does not scale well
- 19. What we reallywant • Scaling (up) behavior of sticky sessions • Node independence of session replication à Isolated nodes with shared session cache
- 20. Isolated nodes withshared session cache Load Balancer Request Arbitrary node Application nodes Cache nodes
- 21. Isolated nodes withshared session cache • Easy load distribution • Easy up- and down-scaling • Tolerant against node failures • Independent scaling of application and cache nodes
- 22. But isn’t thatway too slow?
- 23. Scalability vs. Latency Youneed to give up some latency for an individual user to provide acceptable latency for many users Latencydistribution Not scalable Acceptable latency Single user Many users Scalable Acceptable latency Latencydistribution Single user Many users
- 24. And how doI implement it?
- 25. Interception points • StandardSession(Tomcat) • HttpSessionAttributeListener (JEE) • Valve (Tomcat) • Filter (JEE) • SessionManager (ManagerBase, Tomcat)
- 26. Available libraries • ForRedis • For MemCached • For MongoDB • For Cassandra • …
- 27. Example library • RedisSession Manager for Apache Tomcat https://github.com/jcoleman/tomcat-redis-session-manager • A bit outdated, but easy to use • Usage • Install and start Redis • Copy tomcat-redis-session-manager.jar and jedis-<version>.jar to Tomcat lib directory • Update Tomcat configuration • Restart Tomcat
- 28. context.xml <Context> ... <Valve className="com.radiadesign.catalina.session.RedisSessionHandlerValve" /> <ManagerclassName="com.radiadesign.catalina.session.RedisSessionManager" host="localhost” port="6379" database="0” maxInactiveInterval="60" /> </Context>
- 29. Tradeoffs • Easy toset up and use • No code required, only configuration • Works smoothly • Not best for web frameworks that store lots of session state • Does not work well with AJAX • Does not work with single page applications à Another reason to prefer ROCA style?
- 30. General design rule • Move state either to the frontend and/or to the backend • Make everything else stateless • Use caches if that’s too slow (but be aware of their tradeoffs) Frontend Client Backend Store Application Stateful Stateful Stateless
- 31. Challenges of scalabledatastores • Requires relaxed consistency guarantees • Leads to (temporal) anomalies and inconsistencies short-term due to replication or long-term due to partitioning It might happen. Thus, it will happen!
- 32. C Consistency A Availability P Partition Tolerance Strict Consistency ACID/ 2PC Strong Consistency Quorum R&W / Paxos Eventual Consistency CRDT / Gossip / Hinted Handoff
- 33. Strict Consistency (CA) • Great programming model no anomalies or inconsistencies need to be considered • Does not scale well best for single node databases „We know ACID – It works!“ „We know 2PC – It sucks!“ Use for moderate data amounts
- 34. And what ifI need more data? • Distributed datastore • Partition tolerance is a must • Need to give up strict consistency (CP or AP)
- 35. Strong Consistency (CP) • Majority based consistency model can tolerate up to N nodes failing out of 2N+1 nodes • Good programming model Single-copy consistency • Trades consistency for availability in case of partitioning Paxos (for sequential consistency) Quorum-based reads & writes
- 36. And what ifI need more availability? • Need to give up strong consistency (CP) • Relax required consistency properties even more • Leads to eventual consistency (AP)
- 37. Eventual Consistency (AP) • Gives up some consistency guarantees no sequential consistency, anomalies become visible • Maximum availability possible can tolerate up to N-1 nodes failing out of N nodes • Challenging programming model anomalies usually need to be resolved explicitly Gossip / Hinted Handoffs CRDT
- 38. Conflict-free Replicated DataTypes • Eventually consistent, self-stabilizing data structures • Designed for maximum availability • Tolerates up to N-1 out of N nodes failing State-based CRDT: Convergent Replicated Data Type (CvRDT) Operation-based CRDT: Commutative Replicated Data Type (CmRDT)
- 39. A bit oftheory first ...
- 40. Convergent Replicated DataType State-based CRDT – CvRDT • All replicas (usually) connected • Exchange state between replicas, calculate new state on target replica • State transfer at least once over eventually-reliable channels • Set of possible states form a Semilattice • Partially ordered set of elements where all subsets have a Least Upper Bound (LUB) • All state changes advance upwards with respect to the partial order
- 41. Commutative Replicated DataType Operation-based CRDT - CmRDT • All replicas (usually) connected • Exchange update operations between replicas, apply on target replica • Reliable broadcast with ordering guarantee for non-concurrent updates • Concurrent updates must be commutative
- 42. That‘s been enoughtheory ...
- 43.
- 44. Op-based Counter Data Integer i Init i≔ 0 Query return i Operations increment(): i ≔ i + 1 decrement(): i ≔ i - 1
- 45. State-based G-Counter (growonly) (Naïve approach) Data Integer i Init i ≔ 0 Query return i Update increment(): i ≔ i + 1 Merge( j) i ≔ max(i, j)
- 46. State-based G-Counter (growonly) (Naïve approach) R1 R3 R2 i = 1 U i = 1 U i = 0 i = 0 i = 0 I I I M i = 1 i = 1 M
- 47. State-based G-Counter (growonly) (Vector-based approach) Data Integer V[] / one element per replica set Init V ≔ [0, 0, ... , 0] Query return ∑i V[i] Update increment(): V[i] ≔ V[i] + 1 / i is replica set number Merge(V‘) ∀i ∈ [0, n-1] : V[i] ≔ max(V[i], V‘[i])
- 48. State-based G-Counter (growonly) (Vector-based approach) R1 R3 R2 V = [1, 0, 0] U V = [0, 0, 0] I I I V = [0, 0, 0] V = [0, 0, 0] U V = [0, 0, 1] M V = [1, 0, 0] M V = [1, 0, 1]
- 49. State-based PN-Counter (pos./neg.) • Simple vector approach as with G-Counter does not work • Violates monotonicity requirement of semilattice • Need to use two vectors • Vector P to track incements • Vector N to track decrements • Query result is ∑i P[i] – N[i]
- 50. State-based PN-Counter (pos./neg.) Data IntegerP[], N[] / one element per replica set Init P ≔ [0, 0, ... , 0], N ≔ [0, 0, ... , 0] Query Return ∑i P[i] – N[i] Update increment(): P[i] ≔ P[i] + 1 / i is replica set number decrement(): N[i] ≔ N[i] + 1 / i is replica set number Merge(P‘, N‘) ∀i ∈ [0, n-1] : P[i] ≔ max(P[i], P‘[i]) ∀i ∈ [0, n-1] : N[i] ≔ max(N[i], N‘[i])
- 51. Non-negative Counter Problem: Howto check a global invariant with local information only? • Approach 1: Only dec if local state is > 0 • Concurrent decs could still lead to negative value • Approach 2: Externalize negative values as 0 • inc(negative value) == noop(), violates counter semantics • Approach 3: Local invariant – only allow dec if P[i] - N[i] > 0 • Works, but may be too strong limitation • Approach 4: Synchronize • Works, but violates assumptions and prerequisites of CRDTs
- 52. More datatypes • Register • Set • Dictionary (Map) • Tree • Graph • Array • List plus several representations for each datatype
- 53. Limitations of CRDTs • Very weak consistency guarantees Strives for „quiescent consistency“ • Eventually consistent Not suitable for high-volume ID generator or alike • Not easy to understand and model • Not all data structures representable Use if availability is extremely important
- 54. Further reading onCRDTs 1. Shapiro et al., Conflict-free Replicated Data Types, Inria Research report, 2011 2. Shapiro et al., A comprehensive study of Convergent and Commutative Replicated Data Types, Inria Research report, 2011 3. Basho Tag Archives: CRDT, https://basho.com/tag/crdt/ 4. Leslie Lamport, Time, clocks, and the ordering of events in a distributed system, Communications of the ACM (1978)
- 55. Wrap-up • Scalability meansscaling up and down • State is the enemy of scalability • Move state to the frontend and backend • Shared session state layer • CRDTs The best way to deal with state is to avoid it
- 56. @ufried Uwe Friedrichsen |uwe.friedrichsen@codecentric.de | http://slideshare.net/ufried | http://ufried.tumblr.com