...

To achieve a higher precision to handle low-latency environments better, we can use Java’s System.nanoTime().

Public Interfaces

Proposed Changes

This KIP proposes using nanoTime() to record latencies to provide higher precision.

...

Consideration #1: How Much Precision?

Compatibility, Deprecation, and Migration Plan

• What impact (if any) will there be on existing users?
• If we are changing behavior how will we phase out the older behavior?
• If we need special migration tools, describe them here.
• When will we remove the existing behavior?

Rejected Alternatives

?

The first question to answer is how much precision do we need?

Since ProducerPerformance currently uses millisecond precision, we will determine the spread using values close to 1.0.

The examples below use two numbers that differ by only 1 in the least significant digit (last/right digit). Bracket denotes inclusive, and parenthesis denotes exclusive.

NOTE: When calculating the spread using numbers with a larger difference, you will observe a higher minimum spread (will not be zero).

Using scale = 1 (1 decimal place)

If we record a latency of 1.1 ms for the first run, and 1.2 ms in the second run, then the true values are:

• 1.1 = [1.05, 1.15)
• 1.2 = [1.15, 1.25)

Min spread: 1.15 - (1.15) = ~0

Max spread: (1.25) - 1.05 = ~0.2

Conclusion: Benchmark 2 is 0 to 20% slower than benchmark 1.

Using scale = 2 (2 decimal places)

If we record a latency of 1.01 ms for the first run, and 1.02 ms in the second run, then the true values are:

• 1.01 = [1.005, 1.015)
• 1.02 = [1.015, 1.025)

Min spread: 1.015 - (1.015) = ~0

Max spread: (1.025) - 1.005 = ~0.02

Conclusion: Benchmark 2 is 0 to 2% slower than benchmark 1.

Using scale = 3 (3 decimal places)

If we record a latency of 1.001 ms for the first run, and 1.002 ms in the second run, then the true values are:

• 1.001 = [1.0005, 1.0015)
• 1.002 = [1.0015, 1.0025)

Min spread: 1.0015 - (1.0015) = ~0

Max spread: (1.0025) - 1.0005 = ~0.0020

Conclusion: Benchmark 2 is 0 to 0.2% slower than benchmark 1.

By using 3 decimal places in millisecond latency measurements, we are able to observe a ~0.2% spread in a low-latency environment dealing with latencies around 1 ms. 3 decimal places for milliseconds is equivalent to microseconds. This 0.2% spread is quite small, especially since other factors are likely to generate a larger variance.

Consideration #2: Long Overflow

It is important to look at potential overflow as we are saving latency in microseconds now, which means each value is multiplied by 1000 (1 millisecond is 1000 microseconds).

To calculate overall average latency, ProducerPerformance will save all observed latencies in a single `totalLatency` long variable.

We can run some calculations to observe how many record latencies can be stored in a Long based on different average latencies.

Image Added

The chart above shows that if the average latency is 1 minute, then a Long can hold 153 billion records (latencies). This covers most use cases.

Public Interfaces

This proposed change only impacts the output of the ProducerPerformance.java class by adding more precision.

Compatibility, Deprecation, and Migration Plan

This proposed change only impacts the output of the ProducerPerformance.java class by adding more precision.

Rejected Alternatives

1. Adding a "low-latency" option to enable recording measurements using System.nanoTime()If there are alternative ways of accomplishing the same thing, what were they? The purpose of this section is to motivate why the design is the way it is and not some other way.