I am running nginx with rails on a small production server to which I submit several jobs per second, each of which return a json result that I have obtained using render json: my_result.
Every time I do a capistrano deployment to production I get very long (5-10 seconds, sometimes more) delay in the rendering step. Once several minutes have passed all this slowness is over.
I tried looking online whether Rails needs to "purge" any previous data that remains in memory due to capistrano having restarted it, but could not find anything, neither how to avoid this issue.
I have the same thing, but I use passenger, every restart it takes a few seconds for it to get itself set. I just kinda excepted the fact that it take a few seconds. but I do see your point it is a nuisance when you are trying to make simple changes quickly to get things the way you need it.
Related
Does anyone have any experience with Rail development page display erratically slowing down and speeding up (page appears 15-20 seconds after the console says the entire page has been rendered).
My development environment is rails 3.0.17 on Mac (Lion), WEBrick 1.3.1, ruby 1.9.2, with Postgres v11 (app supplied by Heroku) for the development database.
Recently, I've noticed some very long delays loading pages... 15 to 20 seconds at times, and the delay is completely unrelated to the complexity of the page, and a given page might load fast several times, then load slow. It might be pretty bad for several minutes, then go away for an hour.
And whether the page loads slow or fast, the rails log always shows the page has rendered fairly quickly... I'll see something like "Completed 200 OK in 486ms" but then the browser might say "waiting for localhost" for another 15 seconds before displaying the page.
Does not seem to depend on the browser (FF or Safari act the same).
Dos not sem to relate to updating the code base. I cna be testing some UI elements and everything is snappy, then suddenly several pages hang for 15-120 seconds.
Still happens even after I added the gem 'rails-dev-boost' to my Gemfile in development.
I also added to my development machine gem 'http_logger' to log calls to external http requests like S3, but don't see that as a factor (the delays often happen on pages that don't access external APIs).
My layouts have a couple of external .js dependencies such as http://static.twilio.com/libs/twiliojs/1.0/twilio.min.js, but I have added that to the bottom of my layout so I would (resumably) still see the page contents quickly if that were being delayed. (Besides, it is probably cached by my browser).
Of course I have tried rebooting the machine, verified activity monitor seems normal for CPU and memory usage. It does not seem to correlate when timemachine is doing its thing.
MORE INFO: per suggestion in comment from AKG below, I used Firebug's web console and most of the time the stylesheets load in a couple of milliseocnds, but when the slowdown occurs I'm seeing delays of 8-20 seconds for most of the stylesheets... which suggests webrick is failing to serve the pages timely?
It could be that buggy/slow middleware is executing after the render is called, but before the response is sent. I recently ran into this issue with pauses of more than 1 minute in some cases, and the culprit turned out to be the Bullet gem, which is designed to help us detect N+1 queries. I removed the middleware and the issue went away!
I got the same problem a few times. I switched to Mongrel. That automatically resolved the issue. However, I got this with Rails 2.3.8.
We're in the process of improving performance of the our rails app hosted at Heroku (rails 3.2.8 and ruby 1.9.3). During this we've come across one alarming problem for which the source seems to be extremely difficult to track. Let me quickly explain how we experience the problem and how we've tried to isolate it.
--
Since around June we've experienced weird lag behavior in Time to First Byte all over the site. The problems is obvious from using the site (sometimes the application doesn't respond for 10-20 seconds), and it's also present in waterfall analysis via webpagetest.org.
We're based in Denmark but get this result from any host.
To confirm the problem we've performed a benchmark test where we send 300 identical requests to a simple page and measured the response time.
If we send 300 requests to the front page the median response time is below 1 second, which is fairly good. What scares us is that 60 requests takes more that double that time and 40 of those takes more than 4 seconds. Some requests take as much as 16 seconds.
None of these slow requests show up in New Relic, which we use for performance monitoring. No request queuing shows up and the results are the same no matter how high we scale our web processes.
Still, we couldn't reject that the problem was caused by application code, so we tried another experiment where we responded to the request via rack middleware.
By placing this middleware (TestMiddleware) at the beginning of the rack stack, we returned a request before it even hit the application, ensuring that none of the following middleware or the rails app could cause the delay.
Middleware setup:
$ heroku run rake middleware
use Rack::Cache
use ActionDispatch::Static
use TestMiddleware
use Rack::Rewrite
use Rack::Lock
use Rack::Runtime
use Rack::MethodOverride
use ActionDispatch::RequestId
use Rails::Rack::Logger
use ActionDispatch::ShowExceptions
use ActionDispatch::DebugExceptions
use ActionDispatch::RemoteIp
use Rack::Sendfile
use ActionDispatch::Callbacks
use ActiveRecord::ConnectionAdapters::ConnectionManagement
use ActiveRecord::QueryCache
use ActionDispatch::Cookies
use ActionDispatch::Session::DalliStore
use ActionDispatch::Flash
use ActionDispatch::ParamsParser
use ActionDispatch::Head
use Rack::ConditionalGet
use Rack::ETag
use ActionDispatch::BestStandardsSupport
use NewRelic::Rack::BrowserMonitoring
use Rack::RailsExceptional
use OmniAuth::Builder
run AU::Application.routes
We then ran the same script to document response time and got pretty much the same result. The median response time was around 130ms (obviously faster because it doesn't hit the app. But still 60 requests took more than 400ms and 25 requests took more than 1 second. Again, with some requests as slow as 16 seconds.
One explanation could be related to slow hops on the network or DNS setup, but the results of traceroute looks perfectly OK.
This result was confirmed from running the response script on another rails 3.2 and ruby 1.9.3 application hosted on Heroku - no weird behavior at all.
The DNS setup follows Heroku's recommendations.
--
We're confused to say the least. Could there be something fishy with Heroku's routing network?
Why the heck are we seeing this weird behavior? How do we get rid of it? And why can't we see it in New Relic?
It Turned out that it was a kind of request queuing. Sometimes, that web server was busy, and since heroku just routs randomly incoming requests randomly to any dyno, then I could end up in a queue behind a dyno, which was totally stuck due to e.g. database problems. The strange thing is, that this was hardly noticeable in new relic (it's a good idea to uncheck all other resources when viewing thins in their charts, then the queuing suddenly appears)
EDIT 21/2 2013: It has turned out, that the reason why it wasn't hardly noticeable in Newrelic was, that it wasn't measured! http://rapgenius.com/Lemon-money-trees-rap-genius-response-to-heroku-lyrics
We find this very frustrating, and we ended up leaving Heroku in favor of dedicated servers. This gave us 20 times better performance at a 1/10 of the cost. Additionally I must say that we are disappointed by Heroku who at the time this happened, denied that the slowness was due to their infrastructure even though we suspected it and highlighted it several times. We even got answers like this back:
Heroku 28/8 2012: "If you're not seeing request queueing or other slowness reported in New Relic, then this is likely not a server-side issue. Heroku's internal routing should take <1ms. None of our monitoring systems are indicating any routing problems currently."
Additionally we spoke to Newrelic who also seemed unaware of the issue, even though they according to them selfs has a very close work relationship with Heroku.
Newrelic 29/8 2012: "It looks like whatever is causing this is happening before the Ruby agent's visibility starts. The queue time that the agent records is from the time the request enters a dyno, so the slow down is occurring before then."
The bottom-line was, that we ended up spending hours and hours on optimizing code that wasn't really the bottleneck. Additionally running with a too high dyno scale in a desperate try to boost our performance, but the only thing that we really got from this was bigger receipts from both Heroku and Newrelic - NOT COOL. I'm glad that we changed.
PS. At that time there even was a bug that caused newrelic pro to be charged on ALL dynos even though we, (according to Newrelics own advice), had disabled the monitoring on our background worker processes. It took a lot of time and many emails before the mistake was admitted by both parties.
PPS. If you are not aware of the current ongoing discussion, then here is the link http://rapgenius.com/James-somers-herokus-ugly-secret-lyrics
EDIT 26/2 2013
Heroku has just announced in their newsletter, that Newrelic has released an update that apparently should cast some light on the situation at Heroku.
EDIT 8/4 2013
Heroku has just released an FAQ over the topic
traceroute is not a good measure of problems in the network, its a tool that can find failures along the network, but it will not show you the best view.
Try just putting up a static webpage and hit it with the ip address from your webpage tester. If it is still slow, blame the network.
If for some reason it is fast, then you have a different issue.
I've currently got a ruby on rails app hosted on Heroku that I'm monitoring with New Relic. My app is somewhat laggy when using it, and my New Relic monitor shows me the following:
Given that majority of the time is spent in Request Queuing, does this mean my app would scale better if I used an extra worker dynos? Or is this something that I can fix by optimizing my code? Sorry if this is a silly question, but I'm a complete newbie, and appreciate all the help. Thanks!
== EDIT ==
Just wanted to make sure I was crystal clear on this before having to shell out additional moolah. So New Relic also gave me the following statistics on the browser side as you can see here:
This graph shows that majority of the time spent by the user is in waiting for the web application. Can I attribute this to the fact that my app is spending majority of its time in a requesting queue? In other words that the 1.3 second response time that the end user is experiencing is currently something that code optimization alone will do little to cut down? (Basically I'm asking if I have to spend money or not) Thanks!
Request Queueing basically means 'waiting for a web instance to be available to process a request'.
So the easiest and fastest way to gain some speed in response time would be to increase the number of web instances to allow your app to process more requests faster.
It might be posible to optimize your code to speed up each individual request to the point where your application can process more requests per minute -- which would pull requests off the queue faster and reduce the overall request queueing problem.
In time, it would still be a good idea to do everything you can to optimize the code anyway. But to begin with, add more workers and your request queueing issue will more than likely be reduced or disappear.
edit
with your additional information, in general I believe the story is still the same -- though nice work in getting to a deep understanding prior to spending the money.
When you have request queuing it's because requests are waiting for web instances to become available to service their request. Adding more web instances directly impacts this by making more instances available.
It's possible that you could optimize the app so well that you significantly reduce the time to process each request. If this happened, then it would reduce request queueing as well by making requests wait a shorter period of time to be serviced.
I'd recommend giving users more web instances for now to immediately address the queueing problem, then working on optimizing the code as much as you can (assuming it's your biggest priority). And regardless of how fast you get your app to respond, if your users grow you'll need to implement more web instances to keep up -- which by the way is a good problem since your users are growing too.
Best of luck!
I just want to throw this in, even though this particular question seems answered. I found this blog post from New Relic and the guys over at Engine Yard: Blog Post.
The tl;dr here is that Request Queuing in New Relic is not necessarily requests actually lining up in the queue and not being able to get processed. Due to how New Relic calculates this metric, it essentially reads a time stamp set in a header by nginx and subtracts it from Time.now when the New Relic method gets a hold of it. However, New Relic gets run after any of your code's before_filter hooks get called. So, if you have a bunch of computationally intensive or database intensive code being run in these before_filters, it's possible that what you're seeing is actually request latency, not queuing.
You can actually examine the queue to see what's in there. If you're using Passenger, this is really easy -- just type passenger status on the command line. This will show you a ton of information about each of your Passenger workers, including how many requests are sitting in the queue. If you run with preceded with watch, the command will execute every 2 seconds so you can see how the queue changes over time (so just execute watch passenger status).
For Unicorn servers, it's a little bit more difficult, but there's a ruby script you can run, available here. This script actually examines how many requests are sitting in the unicorn socket, waiting to be picked up by workers. Because it's examining the socket itself, you shouldn't run this command any more frequently than ~3 seconds or so. The example on GitHub uses 10.
If you see a high number of queued requests, then adding horizontal scaling (via more web workers on Heroku) is probably an appropriate measure. If, however, the queue is low, yet New Relic reports high request queuing, what you're actually seeing is request latency, and you should examine your before_filters, and either scope them to only those methods that absolutely need them, or work on optimizing the code those filters are executing.
I hope this helps anyone coming to this thread in the future!
After performing load testing against an app hosted on Heroku, I am finding that the most DB intensive request takes 50-200ms depending upon load. It never gets slower, no matter the load. However, seemingly at random, the request will outright timeout (30s or more).
On Heroku, why might a relatively high performing query/request work perfectly 8 times out of 10 and outright timeout 2 times out of 10 as load increases?
If this is starting to seem like a question for Heroku itself, I'm looking to first answer the question of whether "bad code" could somehow cause this issue -- or if it is clearly a problem on their end.
A bit more info:
Multiple Dynos
Cedar Stack
Dedicated Heroku DB (16 connections, 1.7 GB RAM, 1 comp. unit)
Rails 3.0.7
Thanks in advance.
Since you have multiple dynos and a dedicated DB instance and are paying hundreds of dollars a month for their service, you should ask Heroku
Edit: I should have added that when you check your logs, you can look for a line that says "routing" That is the Heroku routing layer that takes HTTP request and sends them to your app. You can add those up to see how much time is being spent outside your app. Unfortunately I don't know how easy it is to get large volumes of those logs for a load test.
Ok. I know I don't have a lot of information. That is, essentially, the reason for my question. I am building a game using Flash/Flex and Rails on the back-end. Communication between the two is via WebORB.
Here is what is happening. When I start the client an operation calls the server every 60 seconds (not much, right?) which results in two database SELECTS and an UPDATE and a resulting response to the client.
This repeats every 60 seconds. I deployed a test version on heroku and NewRelic's RPM told me that response time degraded over time. One client with one task every 60 seconds. Over several hours the response time drifted from 150ms to over 900ms in response time.
I have been able to reproduce this in my development environment (my Macbook Pro) so it isn't a problem on Heroku's side.
I am not doing anything sophisticated (by design) in the server app. An action gets called, gets some data from the database, performs an AR update and then returns a response. No caching, etc.
Any thoughts? Anyone? I'd really appreciate it.
What does the development log say is slow for those requests? The view or db? If it's the db, check to see how many records there are in database and see how to optimize the queries. Maybe you need to index some fields.
Are you running locally in development or production mode? I've seen Rails apps performance degrade faster (memory usage) over time in development mode. I'm not sure if one can run an app on Heroku in development mode but if I were you I would check into that.