Skip to content
  1. Feb 05, 2024
    • Alexandru Gheorghe's avatar
      Introduce approval-voting/distribution benchmark (#2621) · f9f88688
      Alexandru Gheorghe authored 
      ## Summary
Built on top of the tooling and ideas introduced in
https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/pull/2528, this PR introduces
a synthetic benchmark for measuring and assessing the performance
characteristics of the approval-voting and approval-distribution
subsystems.

Currently this allows, us to simulate the behaviours of these systems
based on the following dimensions:
```
TestConfiguration:
# Test 1
- objective: !ApprovalsTest
    last_considered_tranche: 89
    min_coalesce: 1
    max_coalesce: 6
    enable_assignments_v2: true
    send_till_tranche: 60
    stop_when_approved: false
    coalesce_tranche_diff: 12
    workdir_prefix: "/tmp"
    num_no_shows_per_candidate: 0
    approval_distribution_expected_tof: 6.0
    approval_distribution_cpu_ms: 3.0
    approval_voting_cpu_ms: 4.30
  n_validators: 500
  n_cores: 100
  n_included_candidates: 100
  min_pov_size: 1120
  max_pov_size: 5120
  peer_bandwidth: 524288000000
  bandwidth: 524288000000
  latency:
    min_latency:
      secs: 0
      nanos: 1000000
    max_latency:
      secs: 0
      nanos: 100000000
  error: 0
  num_blocks: 10
```

## The approach
1. We build a real overseer with the real implementations for
approval-voting and approval-distribution subsystems.
2. For a given network size, for each validator we pre-computed all
potential assignments and approvals it would send, because this a
computation heavy operation this will be cached on a file on disk and be
re-used if the generation parameters don't change.
3. The messages will be sent accordingly to the configured parameters
and those are split into 3 main benchmarking scenarios.

## Benchmarking scenarios

### Best case scenario *approvals_throughput_best_case.yaml*
It send to the approval-distribution only the minimum required tranche
to gathered the needed_approvals, so that a candidate is approved.

### Behaviour in the presence of no-shows *approvals_no_shows.yaml*
It sends the tranche needed to approve a candidate when we have a
maximum of *num_no_shows_per_candidate* tranches with no-shows for each
candidate.

### Maximum throughput *approvals_throughput.yaml*
It sends all the tranches for each block and measures the used CPU and
necessary network bandwidth. by the approval-voting and
approval-distribution subsystem.

## How to run it
```
cargo run -p polkadot-subsystem-bench --release -- test-sequence --path polkadot/node/subsystem-bench/examples/approvals_throughput.yaml
```

## Evaluating performance
### Use the real subsystems metrics
If you follow the steps in
https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/tree/master/polkadot/node/subsystem-bench#install-grafana
for installing locally prometheus and grafana, all real metrics for the
`approval-distribution`, `approval-voting` and overseer are available.
E.g:
<img width="2149" alt="Screenshot 2023-12-05 at 11 07 46"
src="https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/assets/49718502/cb8ae2dd-178b-4922-bfa4-dc37e572ed38">

<img width="2551" alt="Screenshot 2023-12-05 at 11 09 42"
src="https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/assets/49718502/8b4542ba-88b9-46f9-9b70-cc345366081b">

<img width="2154" alt="Screenshot 2023-12-05 at 11 10 15"
src="https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/assets/49718502/b8874d8d-632e-443a-9840-14ad8e90c54f">

<img width="2535" alt="Screenshot 2023-12-05 at 11 10 52"
src="https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/assets/49718502/779a439f-fd18-4985-bb80-85d5afad78e2">

### Profile with pyroscope
1. Setup pyroscope following the steps in
https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/tree/master/polkadot/node/subsystem-bench#install-pyroscope,
then run any of the benchmark scenario with `--profile` as the
arguments.
2. Open the pyroscope dashboard in grafana, e.g:
<img width="2544" alt="Screenshot 2024-01-09 at 17 09 58"
src="https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/assets/49718502/58f50c99-a910-4d20-951a-8b16639303d9">



### Useful  logs
1. Network bandwidth requirements:
```
Payload bytes received from peers: 503993 KiB total, 50399 KiB/block
Payload bytes sent to peers: 629971 KiB total, 62997 KiB/block
```

2. Cpu usage by the approval-distribution/approval-voting subsystems.
```
approval-distribution CPU usage 84.061s
approval-distribution CPU usage per block 8.406s
approval-voting CPU usage 96.532s
approval-voting CPU usage per block 9.653s
```

3. Time passed until a given block is approved
```
 Chain selection approved  after 3500 ms hash=0x0101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101
Chain selection approved  after 4500 ms hash=0x0202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202
```

### Using benchmark to quantify improvements from
https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/pull/1178 +
https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/pull/1191

Using a versi-node we compare the scenarios where all new optimisations
are disabled with a scenarios where tranche0 assignments are sent in a
single message and a conservative simulation where the coalescing of
approvals gives us just 50% reduction in the number of messages we send.

Overall, what we see is a speedup of around 30-40% in the time it takes
to process the necessary messages and a 30-40% reduction in the
necessary bandwidth.

#### Best case scenario comparison(minimum required tranches sent).
Unoptimised
```
    Number of blocks: 10
    Payload bytes received from peers: 53289 KiB total, 5328 KiB/block
    Payload bytes sent to peers: 52489 KiB total, 5248 KiB/block
    approval-distribution CPU usage 6.732s
    approval-distribution CPU usage per block 0.673s
    approval-voting CPU usage 9.523s
    approval-voting CPU usage per block 0.952s
```

vs Optimisation enabled
```
   Number of blocks: 10
   Payload bytes received from peers: 32141 KiB total, 3214 KiB/block
   Payload bytes sent to peers: 37314 KiB total, 3731 KiB/block
   approval-distribution CPU usage 4.658s
   approval-distribution CPU usage per block 0.466s
   approval-voting CPU usage 6.236s
   approval-voting CPU usage per block 0.624s
```

#### Worst case all tranches sent, very unlikely happens when sharding
breaks.

Unoptimised
```
   Number of blocks: 10
   Payload bytes received from peers: 746393 KiB total, 74639 KiB/block
   Payload bytes sent to peers: 729151 KiB total, 72915 KiB/block
   approval-distribution CPU usage 118.681s
   approval-distribution CPU usage per block 11.868s
   approval-voting CPU usage 124.118s
   approval-voting CPU usage per block 12.412s
```

vs optimised
```
    Number of blocks: 10
    Payload bytes received from peers: 503993 KiB total, 50399 KiB/block
    Payload bytes sent to peers: 629971 KiB total, 62997 KiB/block
    approval-distribution CPU usage 84.061s
    approval-distribution CPU usage per block 8.406s
    approval-voting CPU usage 96.532s
    approval-voting CPU usage per block 9.653s
```


## TODOs
[x] Polish implementation.
[x] Use what we have so far to evaluate
https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/pull/1191

 before merging.
[x] List of features and additional dimensions we want to use for
benchmarking.
[x] Run benchmark on hardware similar with versi and kusama nodes.
[ ] Add benchmark to be run in CI for catching regression in
performance.
[ ] Rebase on latest changes for network emulation.

---------

Signed-off-by: default avatarAndrei Sandu <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: default avatarAlexandru Gheorghe <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: default avatarAndrei Sandu <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: default avatarAndrei Sandu <[email protected]>
      f9f88688
  3. Feb 03, 2024
    • Koute's avatar
      Initial support for building RISC-V runtimes targeting PolkaVM (#3179) · e349fc9e
      Koute authored 
      This PR adds initial support for building RISC-V runtimes targeting
PolkaVM.

- Setting the `SUBSTRATE_RUNTIME_TARGET=riscv` environment variable will
now build a RISC-V runtime instead of a WASM runtime.
- This only adds support for *building* runtimes; running them will need
a PolkaVM-based executor, which I will add in a future PR.
- Only building the minimal runtime is supported (building the Polkadot
runtime doesn't work *yet* due to one of the dependencies).
- The builder now sets a `substrate_runtime` cfg flag when building the
runtimes, with the idea being that instead of doing `#[cfg(not(feature =
"std"))]` or `#[cfg(target_arch = "wasm32")]` to detect that we're
building a runtime you'll do `#[cfg(substrate_runtime)]`. (Switching the
whole codebase to use this will be done in a future PR; I deliberately
didn't do this here to keep this PR minimal and reviewable.)
- Further renaming of things (e.g. types, environment variables and proc
macro attributes having "wasm" in their name) to be target-agnostic will
also be done in a future refactoring PR (while keeping backwards
compatibility where it makes sense; I don't intend to break anyone's
workflow or create unnecessary churn).
- This PR also fixes two bugs in the `wasm-builder` crate:
* The `RUSTC` environment variable is now removed when invoking the
compiler. This prevents the toolchain version from being overridden when
called from a `build.rs` script.
* When parsing the `rustup toolchain list` output the `(default)` is now
properly stripped and not treated as part of the version.
- I've also added a minimal CI job that makes sure this doesn't break in
the future. (cc @paritytech/ci)

cc @athei



------

Also, just a fun little tidbit: quickly comparing the size of the built
runtimes it seems that the PolkaVM runtime is slightly smaller than the
WASM one. (`production` build, with the `names` section substracted from
the WASM's size to keep things fair, since for the PolkaVM runtime we're
currently stripping out everything)

- `.wasm`: 625505 bytes
- `.wasm` (after wasm-opt -O3): 563205 bytes
- `.wasm` (after wasm-opt -Os): 562987 bytes
- `.wasm` (after wasm-opt -Oz): 536852 bytes
- `.polkavm`: ~~580338 bytes~~ 550476 bytes (after enabling extra target
features; I'll add those in another PR once we have an executor working)

---------

Co-authored-by: default avatarBastian Köcher <[email protected]>
      e349fc9e
  5. Feb 02, 2024
  7. Jan 31, 2024
  9. Jan 30, 2024
  11. Jan 29, 2024
  13. Jan 28, 2024
  15. Jan 26, 2024
  17. Jan 25, 2024
  19. Jan 24, 2024
  21. Jan 23, 2024
  23. Jan 22, 2024
  25. Jan 21, 2024
  27. Jan 20, 2024
  29. Jan 19, 2024
  31. Jan 18, 2024
  33. Jan 17, 2024
  35. Jan 16, 2024