Bug 1290184

Summary: CFME 5.2.4.2 - UI never returns when attempting to sort 3200 datastores by freespace
Product: Red Hat CloudForms Management Engine Reporter: John Prause <jprause>
Component: PerformanceAssignee: dmetzger
Status: CLOSED NOTABUG QA Contact: Dave Johnson <dajohnso>
Severity: high Docs Contact:
Priority: high    
Version: 5.3.0CC: akrzos, apatters, clasohm, cpelland, dajohnso, dmetzger, jdeubel, jfrey, jhardy, jocarter, jprause, jrafanie, kbrock, mfeifer, nlane, obarenbo, thenness, xlecauch
Target Milestone: GAKeywords: ZStream
Target Release: 5.5.2   
Hardware: x86_64   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: 1182777 Environment:
Last Closed: 2016-01-11 13:32:50 UTC Type: Bug
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On: 1182777    
Bug Blocks: 1110527    

Comment 2 dmetzger 2015-12-10 19:09:39 UTC
The underlying issue is the database cannot (at least is not presently) able to perform the filter for us and simply returns all the objects which leaves Ruby with a much larger (everything) set to process.

Currently the MIQ_Report code passes / copies the set of objects multiple times during processing which increases memory and cpu utilization.

Testing indicates the current (5.5) code filters ~1,000 datastores per second on an essentailly idle appliance with no memory constraint, thus page rendering time is approximately (# of objects / 1,000) per second best case.

The following filters are not performed within the database, thus can be expected to experience slowness at scale:

- % Free Space
- Total Provisioned Space
- Total Hosts
- Managed/Registered VMs
- Managed/Unregistered Vms
- Unmanaged VMs

Comment 3 dmetzger 2016-01-11 13:32:50 UTC
Closing this 5.5.2 instance of this ticket as amy additional changes to improve the performance of the non-DB filtered options will require major changes to how we implement filtering. Unless there is memory contention on the appliance I do not expect the filtering performance to be a significant issue for customers.

I'm leaving the original (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1182777) ticket open for 5.6 as we evaluate changing the filtering model (leverage more filtering in the DB).