1. Tyler Akidau, Alex Balikov, Kaya Bekiro glu, Slava Chernyak, Josh Haberman, Reuven Lax, Sam McVeety, Daniel Mills, Paul Nordstrom, Sam Whittle Google

2.  Motivation and Requirements  Introduction  High level Overview of System  Fundamental abstractions of the MillWheel model  API  Fault tolerance  System implementation.  Experimental results related work 2

3. 3  Records over one-second intervals (bucket) are compared to expected traffic that the model predicts  Consistent mismatch over n windows concludes a query is spiking or dipping  Model is updated with newly received data

4.  Requires both short term and long term storage  Needs duplicate prevention, as duplicate record deliveries could cause spurious spikes.  Should distinguish whether data (expected) is delayed or actually not there. ◦ MillWheel uses low watermark 4

5.  Real time processing of data  Persistent state abstractions to user  Handling of out-of-order data  Constant latency as the system scales to more machines.  Guarantee for exactly-once delivery of records 5

6.  Framework for building low-latency data- processing applications  System manages ◦ Persistent state ◦ Continuous flow of records ◦ Fault-tolerance guarantees  Provides a notion of logical time 6

7.  Provides fault tolerance at the framework level ◦ Correctness is ensured in case of failure ◦ Record are handled in an idempotent fashion  Ensures exactly once delivery of record from the user’s perspective  Check-pointing is at fine granularity ◦ Eliminates buffering of pending data for long periods between check points 7

8. 8

9.  At high level, MillWheel is a graph of computation nodes ◦ Users specify  A directed Computation graph  Application code for individual nodes ◦ Each node takes input and produce output ◦ Computation are also called as transformations  Transformations are parallelized ◦ Users are not concerned with load-balancing at a fine-grained level 9

10.  Users can add and remove computations dynamically  All internal updates are atomically checkpointed per-key ◦ User code can access a per-key, per computation persistent store ◦ Allows for powerful per-key aggregations ◦ Uses replicated, highly available data store (e.g. Spanner) 10

11.  Inputs and outputs in MillWheel are represented by triples. ◦ (key, value, timestamp)  key is a metadata field with semantic  value is an arbitrary byte string  timestamp can be an arbitrary value 11

12. 12

13.  Computations holds the application logic  Code is invoked upon receipt of input data  Code operates in the context of a single key 13

14.  Abstraction for aggregation and comparison between different records (Similar to map reduce)  Key extraction function(Specified by consumer) assigns a key to the record.  Computation code is run in the context of a specific key (accesses state for that specific key only). 14

15.  Provides a bound on the timestamps of future records  Low watermark of A is ◦ min(oldest work of A, low watermark of C)  oldest work of A is the timestamp corresponding to the oldest unfinished record in A. :  Node C produces the output to A for consumption 15

16. 16

17.  Timers are per-key programmatic hooks that trigger at a specific wall time or low watermark value  Timers are journaled in persistent state and can survive process restarts and machine failures  Timer runs the specified user function (when fired) and provides same exactly-once guarantees 17

18. 18

19.  User implements a custom subclass of the Computation class ◦ Provides method for accessing MillWheel abstractions ◦ ProcessRecord and ProcessTimer hooks provide two main entry points into user code ◦ Hooks are triggered in reaction to record receipt and timer expiration  Per-key serialization is handled at the framework level 19

20. 20

21. 21

22. 22

23.  Each computation calculates a low watermark value for all of its pending work ◦ Users rarely deals with low watermarks ◦ Users manipulate them indirectly through timestamp assignation to records.  Injectors bring external data, seed low watermark values for the rest of the pipeline ◦ If injector are distributed across multiple processes the least watermark among all processes is used 23

24.  Exactly-Once Delivery ◦ Steps performed on receipt of an input record for a computation are  Checked for duplication  User code is run for the input  Pending changes are committed to the backing store.  Sender is ACKed  Pending productions are sent( retried until they are ACKed ) ◦ System assigns unique IDs to all records at production time, which are stored to identify duplicate records during retries 24

25.  Strong Productions ◦ Produced records are checkpointed before delivery  Checkpointing is done in same atomic write as state modification  Checkpoints are scanned into memory and replayed, if a process restarts  Checkpoint data is deleted when productions are ACKed  Exactly-Once Delivery and Strong Productions ensures user logic is idempotent 25

26.  Some computations may already be idempotent ◦ Strong productions and/or exactly-once can be disabled  Weak Productions ◦ Broadcast downstream deliveries optimistically, prior to persisting state ◦ Each stage waits for the downstream ACKs of records ◦ Completion times of consecutive stages increases so chances of experiencing a failure increases 26

27. To overcome this, a small fraction of productions are checkpointed, allowing those stages to ACK their senders. This selective checkpointing can both improve end-to-end latency and reduce overall resource consumption. 27

28.  Following user-visible guarantees must satisfy: ◦ No data loss ◦ Updates must ensure exactly-once semantics ◦ All persisted data must be consistent ◦ Low watermarks must reflect all pending state in the system ◦ Timers must fire in-order for a given key 28

29. 29  To avoid Inconsistencies in Persistent state ◦ Per-key update are wrapped as single atomic operation  To avoid network remnant stale writes ◦ Sequencer is attached to each write ◦ Mediator of backing store checks before allowing writes ◦ New worker invalidates any extant sequencer

30. 30

31.  Distributed systems with dynamic set of host servers  Each computation in a pipeline runs on one or more machines ◦ Streams are delivered via RPC  On each machine, the MillWheel system ◦ Marshals incoming work ◦ Manages process-level metadata ◦ Delegates data to the appropriate computation

32.  Load distribution and balancing is handled by a master ◦ Each computation is divided into a set of lexicographic key intervals ◦ Intervals are assigned to a set of machines ◦ Depending on load intervals can be merged or splitted  Low Watermarks ◦ Central authority tracks all low watermark values in the system and journals them to persistent state

33.  In-memory data structures are used to store aggregated timestamp  Consumer computations subscribe low watermark from all the senders ◦ Use minimum of all values ◦ Central authority’s low watermark values is at least as those of the workers

34.  Latency distribution for records when running over 200 CPUs.  Median record delay is 3.6 milliseconds and 95th-percentile latency is 30 milliseconds  Strong productions and exactly once disabled, with both enabled Median Latency jumps to 33.7 milliseconds

35.  Median latency stays roughly constant, regardless of system size  99th-percentile latency does get significantly worse with increase in system size.

36.  Simple three-stage MillWheel pipeline on 200 CPUs  Polled each computation’s low watermark value once per second

37.  Increasing available cache linearly improves CPU usage (after 550MB most data is cached, so further increases were not helpful)