Move perf test command to separate subcommand #2168

marseel · 2023-12-08T12:53:07Z

I really tried to be mindful of splitting that into commits, but unfortunately, I ended up refactoring the whole thing 😢

Summary:

Move cilium connectivity test --perf to separate subcommand cilium connectivity perf
Allow to run host/pod tests together (before you could only run one of), while also allow to test host-to-pod, pod-to-host etc.
Before NodeSelector was totally not working in perf test and we were forcing users to use one zone for nodes, now nodeSelector works and we just warn in case nodes are in different zones (so now we can test both in-zone and across-zones)
Added possibility to export results in json format that can be visualized with perfdash - this will be used for tracking datapath performance in CI
Visualize operation rate next to latency in console output (as they were from the same netperf test)
Always cleanup perf pods before performing tests - to make sure we respect nodeSelector
Refactored netperf integration, it was full of hacks.

Help for perf subcommand:

cilium connectivity perf --help
Test network performance

Usage:
  cilium connectivity perf [flags]

Flags:
  -d, --debug                             Show debug messages
      --deployment-pod-annotations json   Add annotations to the connectivity pods, e.g. '{"client":{"foo":"bar"}}' (default {})
      --duration duration                 Duration for the Performance test to run (default 10s)
  -h, --help                              help for perf
      --host-net                          Test host network
      --node-selector stringToString      Restrict connectivity pods to nodes matching this label (default [])
      --performance-image string          Image path to use for performance (default "quay.io/cilium/network-perf:a816f935930cb2b40ba43230643da4d5751a5711@sha256:679d3a370c696f63884da4557a4466f3b5569b4719bb4f86e8aac02fbe390eea")
      --pod-net                           Test pod network (default true)
      --report-dir string                 Directory to save perf results in json format
      --samples int                       Number of Performance samples to capture (how many times to run each test) (default 1)
      --test-namespace string             Namespace to perform the connectivity in (default "cilium-test")

Global Flags:
      --context string     Kubernetes configuration context
  -n, --namespace string   Namespace Cilium is running in (default "kube-system")

Example output of full tests:

🔥 Network Performance Test Summary:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
📋 Scenario        | Node       | Test            | Duration        | Min             | Mean            | Max             | P50             | P90             | P99             | Transaction rate OP/s
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
📋 pod-to-pod      | same-node  | TCP_RR          | 1s              | 16µs            | 36.6µs          | 6.983ms         | 22µs            | 54µs            | 116µs           | 27126.67    
📋 pod-to-pod      | same-node  | UDP_RR          | 1s              | 14µs            | 30.04µs         | 1.442ms         | 17µs            | 48µs            | 90µs            | 33049.72    
📋 pod-to-pod      | same-node  | TCP_CRR         | 1s              | 286µs           | 490.63µs        | 7.024ms         | 458µs           | 560µs           | 1.125ms         | 2034.74     
📋 pod-to-host     | same-node  | TCP_RR          | 1s              | 12µs            | 31.94µs         | 1.674ms         | 38µs            | 44µs            | 81µs            | 31080.33    
📋 pod-to-host     | same-node  | UDP_RR          | 1s              | 12µs            | 31.07µs         | 1.704ms         | 37µs            | 44µs            | 88µs            | 31974.69    
📋 pod-to-host     | same-node  | TCP_CRR         | 1s              | 190µs           | 333.39µs        | 6.135ms         | 313µs           | 396µs           | 710µs           | 2991.20     
📋 host-to-pod     | same-node  | TCP_RR          | 1s              | 12µs            | 32.51µs         | 7.725ms         | 37µs            | 45µs            | 99µs            | 30553.66    
📋 host-to-pod     | same-node  | UDP_RR          | 1s              | 12µs            | 27.8µs          | 1.226ms         | 22µs            | 42µs            | 83µs            | 35702.75    
📋 host-to-pod     | same-node  | TCP_CRR         | 1s              | 187µs           | 361.23µs        | 9.06ms          | 319µs           | 415µs           | 1.02ms          | 2761.72     
📋 host-to-host    | same-node  | TCP_RR          | 1s              | 12µs            | 30.9µs          | 4.123ms         | 35µs            | 42µs            | 83µs            | 32146.29    
📋 host-to-host    | same-node  | UDP_RR          | 1s              | 11µs            | 28.42µs         | 2.547ms         | 34µs            | 40µs            | 101µs           | 34959.06    
📋 host-to-host    | same-node  | TCP_CRR         | 1s              | 62µs            | 146.65µs        | 8.981ms         | 127µs           | 172µs           | 506µs           | 6794.35     
📋 pod-to-pod      | other-node | TCP_RR          | 1s              | 331µs           | 730.65µs        | 13ms            | 650µs           | 1.037ms         | 2.125ms         | 1363.17     
📋 pod-to-pod      | other-node | UDP_RR          | 1s              | 310µs           | 636.93µs        | 4.923ms         | 581µs           | 891µs           | 1.45ms          | 1564.81     
📋 pod-to-pod      | other-node | TCP_CRR         | 1s              | 936µs           | 2.12513ms       | 9.839ms         | 1.585ms         | 5.566ms         | 6.85ms          | 469.93      
📋 pod-to-host     | other-node | TCP_RR          | 1s              | 243µs           | 529.46µs        | 7.377ms         | 499µs           | 727µs           | 1.058ms         | 1881.60     
📋 pod-to-host     | other-node | UDP_RR          | 1s              | 205µs           | 506.11µs        | 16.028ms        | 414µs           | 684µs           | 2.066ms         | 1969.76     
📋 pod-to-host     | other-node | TCP_CRR         | 1s              | 607µs           | 1.17934ms       | 15.836ms        | 1.085ms         | 1.529ms         | 2.5ms           | 845.96      
📋 host-to-pod     | other-node | TCP_RR          | 1s              | 254µs           | 537.74µs        | 18.134ms        | 481µs           | 736µs           | 1.287ms         | 1851.63     
📋 host-to-pod     | other-node | UDP_RR          | 1s              | 222µs           | 489.01µs        | 4.161ms         | 446µs           | 696µs           | 1.181ms         | 2036.72     
📋 host-to-pod     | other-node | TCP_CRR         | 1s              | 590µs           | 1.11054ms       | 10.26ms         | 1.03ms          | 1.436ms         | 2.3ms           | 898.38      
📋 host-to-host    | other-node | TCP_RR          | 1s              | 223µs           | 503.58µs        | 4.419ms         | 452µs           | 685µs           | 1.45ms          | 1977.50     
📋 host-to-host    | other-node | UDP_RR          | 1s              | 203µs           | 430.1µs         | 4.677ms         | 388µs           | 600µs           | 1.05ms          | 2315.76     
📋 host-to-host    | other-node | TCP_CRR         | 1s              | 529µs           | 949.29µs        | 8.49ms          | 894µs           | 1.252ms         | 1.9ms           | 1049.70     
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
📋 Scenario        | Node       | Test            | Duration        | Throughput Mb/s 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
📋 pod-to-pod      | same-node  | TCP_STREAM      | 1s              | 605.80       
📋 pod-to-pod      | same-node  | UDP_STREAM      | 1s              | 443.89       
📋 pod-to-host     | same-node  | TCP_STREAM      | 1s              | 1102.85      
📋 pod-to-host     | same-node  | UDP_STREAM      | 1s              | 612.62       
📋 host-to-pod     | same-node  | TCP_STREAM      | 1s              | 1364.10      
📋 host-to-pod     | same-node  | UDP_STREAM      | 1s              | 645.54       
📋 host-to-host    | same-node  | TCP_STREAM      | 1s              | 6928.44      
📋 host-to-host    | same-node  | UDP_STREAM      | 1s              | 493.50       
📋 pod-to-pod      | other-node | TCP_STREAM      | 1s              | 350.29       
📋 pod-to-pod      | other-node | UDP_STREAM      | 1s              | 141.66       
📋 pod-to-host     | other-node | TCP_STREAM      | 1s              | 1401.42      
📋 pod-to-host     | other-node | UDP_STREAM      | 1s              | 169.30       
📋 host-to-pod     | other-node | TCP_STREAM      | 1s              | 3802.40      
📋 host-to-pod     | other-node | UDP_STREAM      | 1s              | 166.53       
📋 host-to-host    | other-node | TCP_STREAM      | 1s              | 3894.40      
📋 host-to-host    | other-node | UDP_STREAM      | 1s              | 202.85       
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fixes #1111
Fixes #2114

marseel · 2023-12-08T14:27:28Z

/cc @darox @learnitall
as you worked on the perf test before, I would appreciate your reviews.

darox · 2023-12-11T10:19:53Z

/cc @darox @learnitall as you worked on the perf test before, I would appreciate your reviews.

Great, I planned to work on refactoring, but you were faster. Planning to have a look at it this week (obviously customer tickets have priority).

marseel · 2023-12-11T13:44:36Z

I think we can diregard EKS (tunnel) / EKS (tunnel) Installation and Connectivity Test (classic) (pull_request_target) failure as it pulls in-cluster-test-scripts from main, where it tries to run cilium connectivity test --perf --perf-duration 1s

derailed

@marseel Nice work! Just a few small picks...

derailed · 2023-12-11T20:07:21Z

connectivity/check/context.go

-					d.Latency["p90"][0], d.Metric,
-					d.Latency["p99"][0], d.Metric)
+		ct.Header("🔥 Network Performance Test Summary:")
+		ct.Logf("%s", strings.Repeat("-", 200))


Might be cleaner to define a PerfResult type vs the simple map and hang Printer methods to output the different perf tables. Also you could hang helpers aka nodeString.
We could perhaps leverage a table printing lib and use it for tabular output.
Lastly we could sort the results to make it for a quick perf scan.

I agree that using some kind of table lib would be great.

So I definitely agree with using some lib for printing table and also cleaning up this mess, but I think it's out of scope of this PR. I am happy to create follow-up issue for that.
Re sorting, results are already sorted in PerfResults - that's why I changed it from map to list (before they weren't sorted) + added sorting here

cilium-cli/connectivity/check/deployment.go

Line 1097 in 0099fbf

sort.SliceStable(ct.perfServerPod, func(i, j int) bool {

While I would do it differently normally and sort results in the presentation layer, I wanted to do it as simply as possible for now as this part was not really my goal of improving console presentation format.

connectivity/perf/benchmarks/netperf/perfpod.go

connectivity/perf/common/metrics.go

derailed · 2023-12-11T20:22:15Z

connectivity/perf/benchmarks/netperf/perfpod.go

+		res.Latency = nil
+		// Verify that throughput unit is 10^6bits/s
+		if values[8] != "10^6bits/s" {
+			a.Fatal("Unable to process netperf result")


Perhaps this call should return an err and let the call site decide vs bombing?

I don't think it's worth it - we already handle a bunch of errors through a.Fatal - FYI this is just failing a single action, not the whole program.

connectivity/perf/benchmarks/netperf/perfpod.go

learnitall

Thank you for doing this, I'm very excited for the perfdash integration. I have a couple of suggestions and nits, please let me know what you think.

learnitall · 2023-12-11T22:08:12Z

connectivity/check/context.go

-					d.Latency["p90"][0], d.Metric,
-					d.Latency["p99"][0], d.Metric)
+		ct.Header("🔥 Network Performance Test Summary:")
+		ct.Logf("%s", strings.Repeat("-", 200))


I agree that using some kind of table lib would be great.

connectivity/perf/common/metrics.go

internal/cli/cmd/connectivity.go

connectivity/perf/benchmarks/netperf/perfpod.go

marseel · 2023-12-12T12:43:58Z

Thanks for the reviews, I pushed changed as separate commit to make it easier for you to review it - I will squash them later on.

derailed

@marseel SG - Thanks for the updates!

.github/workflows/aks-byocni.yaml

darox · 2023-12-13T09:37:31Z

/cc @darox @learnitall as you worked on the perf test before, I would appreciate your reviews.

Great, I planned to work on refactoring, but you were faster. Planning to have a look at it this week (obviously customer tickets have priority).

I see you removed me from the reviewers. Makes sense, the others have deeper Go knowledge than me.

Before, perf test was part of `connectivity test` subcommand. Now, perf test has separate `connectivity perf` subcommand. We allow to run both host and pod network perf test in a single command. We allow to test host-to-pod type of traffic too. Perf test now respects nodeSelector and allows to run for nodes in two different zones. Always force deploy test pods for perf test to respect nodeSelector. You can export perf test results in json format, which is compatible with perfdash. Fixes: #1111 Fixes: #2114 Signed-off-by: Marcel Zieba <[email protected]>

marseel · 2023-12-13T10:42:22Z

Since I removed pull_request: {} from workflows I expect that the test will be failing right now -but this is fine, they were passing before with it.

ldelossa

Looks reasonable to me.

marseel · 2023-12-13T15:32:35Z

I'm marking this PR as ready-to-merge as tests passed before with pull_request, but they do not pass currently with pull_request_target as I am modyfing in-cluster-test-scripts

pchaigno · 2023-12-15T17:46:45Z

I believe this pull request broke main. At least, the following is currently failing for me on main locally and in my rebased PR:

$ make && ./cilium connectivity perf --duration 1s
CGO_ENABLED=0 go build  \
	-ldflags "-w -s \
	-X 'github.com/cilium/cilium-cli/cli.Version=v0.15.18'" \
	-o cilium \
	./cmd/cilium
unknown flag: --duration

pchaigno · 2023-12-15T17:50:52Z

Hm, my local clone wasn't on latest main and after pulling it doesn't fail anymore. And apparently GitHub sometimes lies about PRs being up-to-date because I had this:

Yet I just updated the branch after rebasing...

So false alert (and weird GH bug). Sorry for the noise!

marseel temporarily deployed to ci December 8, 2023 12:53 — with GitHub Actions Inactive

marseel force-pushed the netperf_with_perfdash_integration branch from 12a0bec to f0ff431 Compare December 8, 2023 13:59

marseel temporarily deployed to ci December 8, 2023 13:59 — with GitHub Actions Inactive

marseel added the kind/enhancement This would improve or streamline existing functionality. label Dec 8, 2023

marseel force-pushed the netperf_with_perfdash_integration branch from f0ff431 to de07125 Compare December 8, 2023 14:04

marseel temporarily deployed to ci December 8, 2023 14:04 — with GitHub Actions Inactive

marseel changed the title ~~Netperf with perfdash integration~~ Move perf test command to separate subcommand Dec 8, 2023

marseel force-pushed the netperf_with_perfdash_integration branch from de07125 to c82a67c Compare December 8, 2023 14:10

marseel temporarily deployed to ci December 8, 2023 14:10 — with GitHub Actions Inactive

marseel force-pushed the netperf_with_perfdash_integration branch from c82a67c to 9abae58 Compare December 8, 2023 14:15

marseel temporarily deployed to ci December 8, 2023 14:15 — with GitHub Actions Inactive

marseel temporarily deployed to ci December 11, 2023 09:08 — with GitHub Actions Inactive

marseel added the dont-merge/preview-only Only for preview or testing, don't merge it. label Dec 11, 2023

marseel marked this pull request as ready for review December 11, 2023 09:34

marseel requested review from a team as code owners December 11, 2023 09:34

marseel requested review from derailed, ldelossa, christarazi and viktor-kurchenko December 11, 2023 09:34

marseel force-pushed the netperf_with_perfdash_integration branch from 05dfd80 to 9248a9a Compare December 11, 2023 09:52

marseel temporarily deployed to ci December 11, 2023 09:52 — with GitHub Actions Inactive

derailed reviewed Dec 11, 2023

View reviewed changes

learnitall suggested changes Dec 11, 2023

View reviewed changes

marseel temporarily deployed to ci December 12, 2023 12:41 — with GitHub Actions Inactive

marseel requested review from derailed and learnitall December 12, 2023 14:33

derailed approved these changes Dec 12, 2023

View reviewed changes

christarazi approved these changes Dec 12, 2023

View reviewed changes

learnitall approved these changes Dec 12, 2023

View reviewed changes

viktor-kurchenko reviewed Dec 13, 2023

View reviewed changes

.github/workflows/aks-byocni.yaml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

viktor-kurchenko approved these changes Dec 13, 2023

View reviewed changes

marseel force-pushed the netperf_with_perfdash_integration branch from 76325d1 to ddbd54a Compare December 13, 2023 10:40

marseel temporarily deployed to ci December 13, 2023 10:40 — with GitHub Actions Inactive

ldelossa approved these changes Dec 13, 2023

View reviewed changes

marseel removed the dont-merge/preview-only Only for preview or testing, don't merge it. label Dec 13, 2023

marseel added the ready-to-merge This PR has passed all tests and received consensus from code owners to merge. label Dec 13, 2023

nebril merged commit 4e51788 into main Dec 15, 2023
7 of 13 checks passed

nebril deleted the netperf_with_perfdash_integration branch December 15, 2023 11:07

thorn3r mentioned this pull request Jan 10, 2024

Fixes cilium clustermesh disconnect #2185

Merged

marseel mentioned this pull request Jul 24, 2024

Improve network perf test #2695

Closed

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Move perf test command to separate subcommand #2168

Move perf test command to separate subcommand #2168

marseel commented Dec 8, 2023 •

edited

Loading

marseel commented Dec 8, 2023 •

edited

Loading

darox commented Dec 11, 2023

marseel commented Dec 11, 2023

derailed left a comment

derailed Dec 11, 2023

learnitall Dec 11, 2023

marseel Dec 12, 2023 •

edited

Loading

derailed Dec 11, 2023

marseel Dec 12, 2023

learnitall left a comment •

edited

Loading

learnitall Dec 11, 2023

marseel commented Dec 12, 2023

derailed left a comment

darox commented Dec 13, 2023

marseel commented Dec 13, 2023

ldelossa left a comment

marseel commented Dec 13, 2023

pchaigno commented Dec 15, 2023

pchaigno commented Dec 15, 2023

Move perf test command to separate subcommand #2168

Move perf test command to separate subcommand #2168

Conversation

marseel commented Dec 8, 2023 • edited Loading

marseel commented Dec 8, 2023 • edited Loading

darox commented Dec 11, 2023

marseel commented Dec 11, 2023

derailed left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

derailed Dec 11, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

learnitall Dec 11, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

marseel Dec 12, 2023 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

derailed Dec 11, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

marseel Dec 12, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

learnitall left a comment • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

learnitall Dec 11, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

marseel commented Dec 12, 2023

derailed left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

darox commented Dec 13, 2023

marseel commented Dec 13, 2023

ldelossa left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

marseel commented Dec 13, 2023

pchaigno commented Dec 15, 2023

pchaigno commented Dec 15, 2023

marseel commented Dec 8, 2023 •

edited

Loading

marseel commented Dec 8, 2023 •

edited

Loading

marseel Dec 12, 2023 •

edited

Loading

learnitall left a comment •

edited

Loading