Making Sense of Multi-threaded Application Performance at Scale with NonSequitur
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Modern multi-threaded systems are highly complex. This makes their behavior difficult to understand. Developers frequently capture behavior in the form of program traces and then manually inspect these traces. Existing tools, however, fail to scale to traces larger than a million events. In this paper we present an approach to compress multi-threaded traces in order to allow developers to visually explore these traces at scale. Our approach is able to compress traces that contain millions of events down to a few hundred events. We use this approach to design and implement a tool called NonSequitur. We present three case studies which demonstrate how we used NonSequitur to analyze real-world performance issues with Meta’s storage engine RocksDB and MongoDB’s storage engine WiredTiger, two complex database backends. We also evaluate NonSequitur with 42 participants on traces from RocksDB and WiredTiger. We demonstrate that, in some cases, participants on average scored 11 times higher when performing performance analysis tasks on large execution traces. Additionally, for some performance analysis tasks, the participants spent on average three times longer with other tools than with NonSequitur.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.050 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".