Edge Computing · Showcase · Two weeks with edge-computing-show: what feels right and what drives me up the wall

1.7K
ECr/edge-computing-show·posted by kite·yesterdayHelp

Two weeks with edge-computing-show: what feels right and what drives me up the wall

It took me two weeks of on-and-off digging and plenty of wrong turns. Writing the process down as it happened so the next person spends less time.

What genuinely surprised me was the tail. The average looked great while P99 jumped by an order of magnitude past some threshold. The cause was not edge-computing-show itself but our upstream connection reuse — the load test traffic was too clean and hid the long-tail requests.

We also fixed monitoring along the way: replaced average-based alerts with percentiles and split them per endpoint. False alerts dropped by about seventy percent and the on-call rotation visibly cheered up.

Worth noting: the official docs do cover this, just in a very inconspicuous spot. I only found it reading the source comments, where the author explains the reasoning — roughly "so that it degrades into predictable behaviour in extreme cases".

501 comments

501 comments

· first 120 loaded
M
Bbob_chenOP·2 days ago

Thanks for sharing real numbers — far more useful than the articles that only cover concepts.

475
Ddev_zhouOP·1 hour ago

Can you give a minimal reproduction? I ran it locally for ten minutes and could not reproduce on macOS with the latest version.

473
Zzhou_yi·3 minutes ago

I just read the edge-computing-show source — the author actually explains the reasoning in a comment, roughly "so that it degrades into predictable behaviour in extreme cases".

110
Llinlin·just now

Worth learning from this debugging approach. We went straight at the logs and took a much longer route.

405
Rran_bo·2 days ago

Worth learning from this debugging approach. We went straight at the logs and took a much longer route.

268
Zzhou_yi·12 minutes ago

This is not a edge-computing-show problem, it is a usage problem. The docs say this API is not thread-safe and you must lock around it yourself.

183
Kkite·2 days ago

Can you give a minimal reproduction? I ran it locally for ten minutes and could not reproduce on macOS with the latest version.

67
Ttang_hao·2 days ago

Has anyone run a controlled experiment? I did, reducing it to a single variable, and the difference was 4% — within noise. So I suspect the main cause is something else.

135
Ddev_zhou·2 days agoLevel 6

Has anyone run a controlled experiment? I did, reducing it to a single variable, and the difference was 4% — within noise. So I suspect the main cause is something else.

260
Mmike_xuOP·2 days agoLevel 6

I just read the edge-computing-show source — the author actually explains the reasoning in a comment, roughly "so that it degrades into predictable behaviour in extreme cases".

192
Llinlin·2 days ago

Sharing our numbers, 8 cores 16GB, same scenario:

| Concurrency | P50 | P99 |
|---|---|---|
| 200 | 12ms | 88ms |
| 500 | 31ms | 340ms |

P99 clearly collapses at 500 concurrency, which lines up with your knee point.

59
Kkernel_panic·2 days ago

A question: what changes in a container with a 512Mi memory limit? That is how we run it in production.

69
Ttang_hao·2 days ago

Saved. I am reworking this area this week — this saves a lot of wrong turns.

2
Oops_wang·28 minutes ago

Saved. I am reworking this area this week — this saves a lot of wrong turns.

4
Wwinter·5 hours ago

One counter-example: below edge-computing-show 7.4 the semantics of that code are different, so do not copy it verbatim. We got burned in staging and rolled back once.

1
Rrase·just now

We have run this in production for two years without hitting it. That said, we never reached this scale, so our experience is not really evidence here.

2
Mmike_xuMod·2 days ago

We have run this in production for two years without hitting it. That said, we never reached this scale, so our experience is not really evidence here.

498
Ttang_hao·2 days ago

Worth learning from this debugging approach. We went straight at the logs and took a much longer route.

196
NnikicOP·2 days ago

We have run this in production for two years without hitting it. That said, we never reached this scale, so our experience is not really evidence here.

62
Mmike_xu·2 days ago

Agreeing with the above. One addition: with this option enabled the GC count in your metrics doubles, so adjust the alert threshold at the same time or it will keep firing.

10
Ddev_zhou·2 days agoeditedLevel 6

We have run this in production for two years without hitting it. That said, we never reached this scale, so our experience is not really evidence here.

95
Cchen_dev·2 days agoedited

There is actually a simpler fix that needs no architecture change: move this check up to the gateway and the problem disappears. The cost is one extra lookup at the gateway.

4
Zzhou_yi·12 minutes ago

We have run this in production for two years without hitting it. That said, we never reached this scale, so our experience is not really evidence here.

155
Oops_wang·2 days ago

Sharing our numbers, 8 cores 16GB, same scenario:

| Concurrency | P50 | P99 |
|---|---|---|
| 200 | 12ms | 88ms |
| 500 | 31ms | 340ms |

P99 clearly collapses at 500 concurrency, which lines up with your knee point.

160
Oops_wang·2 days agoeditedLevel 6

There is actually a simpler fix that needs no architecture change: move this check up to the gateway and the problem disappears. The cost is one extra lookup at the gateway.

255
Ttang_hao·2 days ago

I see point 3 differently. The trade-off depends on your read/write ratio: read-heavy with little writing means caching actually widens the inconsistency window.

101
Lli_ming·2 days agoedited

Sharing our numbers, 8 cores 16GB, same scenario:

| Concurrency | P50 | P99 |
|---|---|---|
| 200 | 12ms | 88ms |
| 500 | 31ms | 340ms |

P99 clearly collapses at 500 concurrency, which lines up with your knee point.

414
Bbob_chen·2 days agoLevel 6

Agreeing with the above. One addition: with this option enabled the GC count in your metrics doubles, so adjust the alert threshold at the same time or it will keep firing.

238
Nnikic·2 days ago

Worth learning from this debugging approach. We went straight at the logs and took a much longer route.

6
Hhuang_ke·2 days agoedited

Can you give a minimal reproduction? I ran it locally for ten minutes and could not reproduce on macOS with the latest version.

1
Kkernel_panic·2 days ago

I just read the edge-computing-show source — the author actually explains the reasoning in a comment, roughly "so that it degrades into predictable behaviour in extreme cases".

513
Aalice_devOP·just nowedited

I just read the edge-computing-show source — the author actually explains the reasoning in a comment, roughly "so that it degrades into predictable behaviour in extreme cases".

445
Kkernel_panic·2 days ago

Can you give a minimal reproduction? I ran it locally for ten minutes and could not reproduce on macOS with the latest version.

481
Lli_mingMod·12 minutes ago

This is not a edge-computing-show problem, it is a usage problem. The docs say this API is not thread-safe and you must lock around it yourself.

474
Wwinter·2 days ago

Agreeing with the above. One addition: with this option enabled the GC count in your metrics doubles, so adjust the alert threshold at the same time or it will keep firing.

459
Oops_wang·2 days ago

Saved. I am reworking this area this week — this saves a lot of wrong turns.

418
Rrase·5 hours ago

This matches what we see in production. We only hit it past 3k QPS; the earlier load tests showed nothing — the test traffic was too clean, with no long-tail requests.

397
Zzhou_yi·2 hours ago

I see point 3 differently. The trade-off depends on your read/write ratio: read-heavy with little writing means caching actually widens the inconsistency window.

144
Rran_boMod·28 minutes ago

Saved. I am reworking this area this week — this saves a lot of wrong turns.

342
Wwinter·28 minutes ago

Thanks for sharing real numbers — far more useful than the articles that only cover concepts.

341
Sslow_queryOP·12 minutes ago

A question: what changes in a container with a 512Mi memory limit? That is how we run it in production.

263
Rran_bo·2 days ago

Has anyone run a controlled experiment? I did, reducing it to a single variable, and the difference was 4% — within noise. So I suspect the main cause is something else.

105
Ddev_zhouMod·2 days ago

Agreeing with the above. One addition: with this option enabled the GC count in your metrics doubles, so adjust the alert threshold at the same time or it will keep firing.

1
Zzhou_yi·2 days ago

There is actually a simpler fix that needs no architecture change: move this check up to the gateway and the problem disappears. The cost is one extra lookup at the gateway.

414
Zzhou_yi·2 days agoLevel 6

There is actually a simpler fix that needs no architecture change: move this check up to the gateway and the problem disappears. The cost is one extra lookup at the gateway.

309
Kkernel_panic·2 days ago

This matches what we see in production. We only hit it past 3k QPS; the earlier load tests showed nothing — the test traffic was too clean, with no long-tail requests.

199
Cchen_dev·2 days agoedited

This matches what we see in production. We only hit it past 3k QPS; the earlier load tests showed nothing — the test traffic was too clean, with no long-tail requests.

13
Zzhu_zong·2 days agoLevel 6

A question: what changes in a container with a 512Mi memory limit? That is how we run it in production.

440
Nnikic·2 days ago

One counter-example: below edge-computing-show 7.4 the semantics of that code are different, so do not copy it verbatim. We got burned in staging and rolled back once.

52
RraseMod·2 days ago

Has anyone run a controlled experiment? I did, reducing it to a single variable, and the difference was 4% — within noise. So I suspect the main cause is something else.

298
Sslow_query·2 days ago

Saved. I am reworking this area this week — this saves a lot of wrong turns.

256
Rran_bo·2 days ago

We have run this in production for two years without hitting it. That said, we never reached this scale, so our experience is not really evidence here.

231
Ddev_zhou·2 days ago

Worth learning from this debugging approach. We went straight at the logs and took a much longer route.

227
Nnikic·2 days ago

This matches what we see in production. We only hit it past 3k QPS; the earlier load tests showed nothing — the test traffic was too clean, with no long-tail requests.

217
KkiteOP·2 days ago

Thanks for sharing real numbers — far more useful than the articles that only cover concepts.

16
Kkernel_panic·2 days ago

I see point 3 differently. The trade-off depends on your read/write ratio: read-heavy with little writing means caching actually widens the inconsistency window.

163
Sslow_queryOP·2 days agoedited

This matches what we see in production. We only hit it past 3k QPS; the earlier load tests showed nothing — the test traffic was too clean, with no long-tail requests.

89
Mmike_xuOP·2 days ago

This matches what we see in production. We only hit it past 3k QPS; the earlier load tests showed nothing — the test traffic was too clean, with no long-tail requests.

67
Zzhu_zong·2 hours ago

We have run this in production for two years without hitting it. That said, we never reached this scale, so our experience is not really evidence here.

122
Mmike_xu·2 days ago

Sharing our numbers, 8 cores 16GB, same scenario:

| Concurrency | P50 | P99 |
|---|---|---|
| 200 | 12ms | 88ms |
| 500 | 31ms | 340ms |

P99 clearly collapses at 500 concurrency, which lines up with your knee point.

119
Ttang_hao·2 days ago

Agreeing with the above. One addition: with this option enabled the GC count in your metrics doubles, so adjust the alert threshold at the same time or it will keep firing.

1
KkiteMod·2 days ago

I just read the edge-computing-show source — the author actually explains the reasoning in a comment, roughly "so that it degrades into predictable behaviour in extreme cases".

105
Lli_mingOP·12 minutes ago

Has anyone run a controlled experiment? I did, reducing it to a single variable, and the difference was 4% — within noise. So I suspect the main cause is something else.

43
Lli_ming·2 days ago

Worth learning from this debugging approach. We went straight at the logs and took a much longer route.

1
Hhuang_ke·2 days ago

I just read the edge-computing-show source — the author actually explains the reasoning in a comment, roughly "so that it degrades into predictable behaviour in extreme cases".

12
Zzhou_yi·2 days ago

This is not a edge-computing-show problem, it is a usage problem. The docs say this API is not thread-safe and you must lock around it yourself.

16
LlinlinOP·2 days ago

Thanks for sharing real numbers — far more useful than the articles that only cover concepts.

40
Zzhu_zong·2 days ago

Can you give a minimal reproduction? I ran it locally for ten minutes and could not reproduce on macOS with the latest version.

95
NnikicOP·2 days ago

There is actually a simpler fix that needs no architecture change: move this check up to the gateway and the problem disappears. The cost is one extra lookup at the gateway.

31
Oops_wang·2 days ago

Thanks for sharing real numbers — far more useful than the articles that only cover concepts.

1
Cchen_dev·2 days ago

One counter-example: below edge-computing-show 7.4 the semantics of that code are different, so do not copy it verbatim. We got burned in staging and rolled back once.

129
Cchen_dev·5 hours ago

I just read the edge-computing-show source — the author actually explains the reasoning in a comment, roughly "so that it degrades into predictable behaviour in extreme cases".

235
Kkite·2 days ago

Saved. I am reworking this area this week — this saves a lot of wrong turns.

44
Hhuang_ke·2 days agoedited

A question: what changes in a container with a 512Mi memory limit? That is how we run it in production.

104
Nnikic·yesterday

A question: what changes in a container with a 512Mi memory limit? That is how we run it in production.

1
Oops_wang·2 days ago

I see point 3 differently. The trade-off depends on your read/write ratio: read-heavy with little writing means caching actually widens the inconsistency window.

68
Kkernel_panic·2 days ago

This is not a edge-computing-show problem, it is a usage problem. The docs say this API is not thread-safe and you must lock around it yourself.

433
Hhuang_keOP·2 days agoedited

There is actually a simpler fix that needs no architecture change: move this check up to the gateway and the problem disappears. The cost is one extra lookup at the gateway.

1
Cchen_dev·2 days ago

Thanks for sharing real numbers — far more useful than the articles that only cover concepts.

62
Nnikic·2 hours ago

A question: what changes in a container with a 512Mi memory limit? That is how we run it in production.

225
Wwinter·2 days ago

This is not a edge-computing-show problem, it is a usage problem. The docs say this API is not thread-safe and you must lock around it yourself.

244
Hhuang_ke·2 days ago

Thanks for sharing real numbers — far more useful than the articles that only cover concepts.

62
Oops_wang·28 minutes ago

There is actually a simpler fix that needs no architecture change: move this check up to the gateway and the problem disappears. The cost is one extra lookup at the gateway.

61
Aalice_dev·1 hour ago

Sharing our numbers, 8 cores 16GB, same scenario:

| Concurrency | P50 | P99 |
|---|---|---|
| 200 | 12ms | 88ms |
| 500 | 31ms | 340ms |

P99 clearly collapses at 500 concurrency, which lines up with your knee point.

291
Ddev_zhou·just now

A question: what changes in a container with a 512Mi memory limit? That is how we run it in production.

242
Llinlin·2 days ago

Has anyone run a controlled experiment? I did, reducing it to a single variable, and the difference was 4% — within noise. So I suspect the main cause is something else.

239
Ttang_hao·2 days ago

This is not a edge-computing-show problem, it is a usage problem. The docs say this API is not thread-safe and you must lock around it yourself.

122
Zzhou_yi·2 days agoLevel 6

Has anyone run a controlled experiment? I did, reducing it to a single variable, and the difference was 4% — within noise. So I suspect the main cause is something else.

37
Kkite·2 days ago

One counter-example: below edge-computing-show 7.4 the semantics of that code are different, so do not copy it verbatim. We got burned in staging and rolled back once.

93
Sswoole_lee·2 days ago

Saved. I am reworking this area this week — this saves a lot of wrong turns.

1
Oops_wang·2 days agoLevel 6

One counter-example: below edge-computing-show 7.4 the semantics of that code are different, so do not copy it verbatim. We got burned in staging and rolled back once.

408
Ddev_zhouOP·2 days agoLevel 6

Thanks for sharing real numbers — far more useful than the articles that only cover concepts.

2
Kkite·2 days ago

One counter-example: below edge-computing-show 7.4 the semantics of that code are different, so do not copy it verbatim. We got burned in staging and rolled back once.

50
Bbob_chen·2 days ago

This is not a edge-computing-show problem, it is a usage problem. The docs say this API is not thread-safe and you must lock around it yourself.

26
Rran_bo·2 days ago

Worth learning from this debugging approach. We went straight at the logs and took a much longer route.

1
Lli_ming·2 days ago

Agreeing with the above. One addition: with this option enabled the GC count in your metrics doubles, so adjust the alert threshold at the same time or it will keep firing.

34
Aalice_dev·2 days ago

Can you give a minimal reproduction? I ran it locally for ten minutes and could not reproduce on macOS with the latest version.

52
Oops_wang·2 days ago

I see point 3 differently. The trade-off depends on your read/write ratio: read-heavy with little writing means caching actually widens the inconsistency window.

36
Sswoole_lee·2 days ago

We have run this in production for two years without hitting it. That said, we never reached this scale, so our experience is not really evidence here.

29
Zzhou_yi·2 days ago

Can you give a minimal reproduction? I ran it locally for ten minutes and could not reproduce on macOS with the latest version.

37
Bbob_chen·2 days ago

This matches what we see in production. We only hit it past 3k QPS; the earlier load tests showed nothing — the test traffic was too clean, with no long-tail requests.

440
Llinlin·2 days ago

A question: what changes in a container with a 512Mi memory limit? That is how we run it in production.

2
Ttang_haoMod·2 days ago

Can you give a minimal reproduction? I ran it locally for ten minutes and could not reproduce on macOS with the latest version.

29
Llinlin·2 days ago

I see point 3 differently. The trade-off depends on your read/write ratio: read-heavy with little writing means caching actually widens the inconsistency window.

25
Oops_wang·2 days ago

Has anyone run a controlled experiment? I did, reducing it to a single variable, and the difference was 4% — within noise. So I suspect the main cause is something else.

26
Zzhou_yi·2 days ago

Agreeing with the above. One addition: with this option enabled the GC count in your metrics doubles, so adjust the alert threshold at the same time or it will keep firing.

16
Lli_ming·2 days ago

Saved. I am reworking this area this week — this saves a lot of wrong turns.

15
Rrase·2 days ago

This matches what we see in production. We only hit it past 3k QPS; the earlier load tests showed nothing — the test traffic was too clean, with no long-tail requests.

70
Rran_bo·2 days ago

Sharing our numbers, 8 cores 16GB, same scenario:

| Concurrency | P50 | P99 |
|---|---|---|
| 200 | 12ms | 88ms |
| 500 | 31ms | 340ms |

P99 clearly collapses at 500 concurrency, which lines up with your knee point.

5
Sswoole_lee·5 hours ago

Sharing our numbers, 8 cores 16GB, same scenario:

| Concurrency | P50 | P99 |
|---|---|---|
| 200 | 12ms | 88ms |
| 500 | 31ms | 340ms |

P99 clearly collapses at 500 concurrency, which lines up with your knee point.

162
Zzhu_zong·2 days agoedited

One counter-example: below edge-computing-show 7.4 the semantics of that code are different, so do not copy it verbatim. We got burned in staging and rolled back once.

14
Hhuang_ke·2 days ago

Sharing our numbers, 8 cores 16GB, same scenario:

| Concurrency | P50 | P99 |
|---|---|---|
| 200 | 12ms | 88ms |
| 500 | 31ms | 340ms |

P99 clearly collapses at 500 concurrency, which lines up with your knee point.

49
Nnikic·2 days ago

I just read the edge-computing-show source — the author actually explains the reasoning in a comment, roughly "so that it degrades into predictable behaviour in extreme cases".

1
Hhuang_ke·28 minutes ago

Agreeing with the above. One addition: with this option enabled the GC count in your metrics doubles, so adjust the alert threshold at the same time or it will keep firing.

6
Kkernel_panic·2 days ago

Worth learning from this debugging approach. We went straight at the logs and took a much longer route.

6
Zzhou_yi·2 days ago

There is actually a simpler fix that needs no architecture change: move this check up to the gateway and the problem disappears. The cost is one extra lookup at the gateway.

4
Bbob_chen·2 days ago

This is not a edge-computing-show problem, it is a usage problem. The docs say this API is not thread-safe and you must lock around it yourself.

2
Wwinter·2 days ago

Has anyone run a controlled experiment? I did, reducing it to a single variable, and the difference was 4% — within noise. So I suspect the main cause is something else.

1
Sslow_queryMod·2 days ago

One counter-example: below edge-computing-show 7.4 the semantics of that code are different, so do not copy it verbatim. We got burned in staging and rolled back once.

1
Hhuang_ke·2 days ago

I see point 3 differently. The trade-off depends on your read/write ratio: read-heavy with little writing means caching actually widens the inconsistency window.

1

This is the post detail page /en/c/edge-computing-show/post/p1. Posts and comments are generated deterministically from a seeded PRNG, so the same post always renders the same content and the link can be shared, reloaded and indexed. In production this page reads MySQL for the post, Redis for hot-post caching, and fetches the whole comment tree in a single query on the path column.

See the database schema →