Mercurial > hg > orthanc-book
view Sphinx/source/faq/scalability.rst @ 458:839fa91cd799
merge
author | Alain Mazy <alain@mazy.be> |
---|---|
date | Tue, 07 Jul 2020 14:30:13 +0200 |
parents | 987fbbc2b59e |
children | a10f0e5be459 |
line wrap: on
line source
.. _scalability: Scalability of Orthanc ====================== .. contents:: Overview -------- One of the most common question about Orthanc is: *"How many DICOM instances can be stored by Orthanc?"* The source code of Orthanc imposes no such hard limit by itself. At the time of writing, we know that Orthanc is being used in production in hospitals with more than 15TB of data, 125,000 studies and around 50 millions of instances (please `get in touch with us <https://www.orthanc-server.com/static.php?page=contact>`__ if you can share other testimonials). Other users have even reported more than 28TB of data. Here are links to some testimonials that were published on the `Orthanc Users <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/orthanc-users>`__ discussion group: `1 <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/orthanc-users/-L0D1c2y6rw/KmWnwEijAgAJ>`__, `2 <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/orthanc-users/-L0D1c2y6rw/nLXxtYzuCQAJ>`__, `3 <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/orthanc-users/s5-XlgA2BEY/ZpYagqBwAAAJ>`__, `4 <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/orthanc-users/A4hPaJo439s/NwR6zk9FCgAJ>`__, `5 <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/orthanc-users/Z5cLwbVgJc0/SxVzxF7ABgAJ>`__, `6 <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/orthanc-users/6tGNOqlUk-Q/vppkAYnFAQAJ>`__... The stress is actually put on the underlying database engine, and on the storage area (check out :ref:`orthanc-storage`). As explained in the :ref:`troubleshooting section <troubleshooting>`, the built-in SQLite database engine should be replaced by an enterprise-ready database engine once Orthanc must store several hundreds of thousands of DICOM instances (check out the :ref:`postgresql` and :ref:`mysql`). It is also true that the performance of Orthanc in the presence of large databases has continuously improved over time, especially when it comes to the speed of :ref:`DICOM C-FIND <dicom-find>`. .. _scalability-setup: Recommended setup for best performance -------------------------------------- Here is a generic setup that should provide best performance in the presence of large databases: * Make sure to use the latest release of Orthanc (1.7.1 at the time of writing). * We suggest to use the latest release of the :ref:`PostgreSQL plugin <postgresql>` to store the database index (3.2 at the time of writing). Make sure that ``EnableIndex`` is set to ``true``. * Make sure that :ref:`run-time debug assertions <troubleshooting>` are turned off. A warning will show in the logs if this is not the case. Note that all pre-built binaries provided by Osimis are correctly configured in that respect. * We suggest to use the default filesystem storage area. Of course, make sure that the filesystem is properly backed up, and that technologies such as RAID are enabled. Make sure that the option ``EnableStorage`` of the PostgreSQL plugins is set to ``false``. * Obviously, the PostgreSQL database should be stored on a high-speed drive (SSD). This is less important for the storage area. * It may be useful to store the PostgreSQL database on another drive than the storage area. This should improve the use of the available bandwidth to the disks. * The :ref:`Orthanc configuration file <configuration>` should have the following values for performance-related options (but make sure to understand their implications): * ``StorageCompression = false`` * ``LimitFindResults = 100`` * ``LimitFindInstances = 100`` * ``KeepAlive = true`` * ``TcpNoDelay = true`` * ``SaveJobs = false`` * ``StorageAccessOnFind = Never`` * Make sure to carefully :ref:`read the logs <log>` in ``--verbose`` mode, especially at the startup of Orthanc. The logs may contain very important information regarding performance. * Make sure to read guides about the `tuning of PostgreSQL <https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Performance_Optimization>`__. * You might also be interested in checking the options related to :ref:`security <security>`. * Consider using filesystems that are known to achieve high performance, such as `XFS <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XFS>`__ or `Btrfs <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Btrfs>`__ on GNU/Linux distributions. * On GNU/Linux distributions, `LVM (Logical Volume Manager) <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_Volume_Manager_(Linux)>`__ can be used to dynamically and easily grow the storage area as more space becomes needed. * If using the :ref:`DICOMweb server plugin <dicomweb-server-config>`, consider setting configuration option ``StudiesMetadata`` to ``MainDicomTags``. .. _scalability-memory: Controlling memory usage ------------------------ The absence of memory leaks in Orthanc is verified thanks to `valgrind <https://valgrind.org/>`__. On GNU/Linux systems, you might however `observe a large memory consumption <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/orthanc-users/qWqxpvCPv8g/47wnYyhOCAAJ>`__ in the "resident set size" (VmRSS) of the application, notably if you upload multiple large DICOM files using the REST API. This large memory consumption comes from the fact that the embedded HTTP server is heavily multi-threaded, and that many so-called `memory arenas <https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/MallocInternals>`__ are created by the glibc standard library (up to one per thread). As a consequence, if each one of the 50 threads in the HTTP server of Orthanc (default value of the ``HttpThreadsCount`` option) allocates at some point, say, 50MB, the total memory usage reported as "VmRSS" can grow up to 50 threads x 50MB = 2.5GB, even if the Orthanc threads properly free all the buffers. .. highlight:: bash A possible solution to reducing this memory usage is to ask glibc to limit the number of "memory arenas" that are used by the Orthanc process. On GNU/Linux, this can be controlled by setting the environment variable ``MALLOC_ARENA_MAX``. For instance, the following bash command-line would use one single arena that is shared by all the threads in Orthanc:: $ MALLOC_ARENA_MAX=1 ./Orthanc Obviously, this restrictive setting will use minimal memory, but will result in contention among the threads. A good compromise might be to use 5 arenas:: $ MALLOC_ARENA_MAX=5 ./Orthanc Memory allocation on GNU/Linux is a complex topic. There are other options available as environment variables that could also reduce memory consumption (for instance, ``MALLOC_MMAP_THRESHOLD_`` would bypass arenas for large memory blocks such as DICOM files). Check out the `manpage <http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man3/mallopt.3.html>`__ of ``mallopt()`` for more information. .. _scalability-limitations: Known limitations ----------------- Exclusive access to the DB ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ As of Orthanc 1.7.1, the internal code accessing the DB is still affected by limitations induced by the SQLite engine that was the only one originally available at the beginning of the project: inside a single Orthanc process, there is no concurrent access to the DB. One solution to avoid this limitation is to have multiple Orthanc accessing the same DB (works only for MySQL and PostgreSQL) as presented in this `sample <https://bitbucket.org/osimis/orthanc-setup-samples/src/master/docker/multiple-orthancs-on-same-db/>`__. Also note that the core of Orthanc does not currently support the replay of database transactions, which is necessary to deal with conflicts between several instances of Orthanc that would simultaneously write to the database. As a consequence, as of Orthanc 1.7.1, when connecting multiple Orthanc to a single database by setting ``Lock`` to ``false``, there should only be one instance of Orthanc acting as a writer and all the other instances of Orthanc acting as readers only. Be careful to set the option ``SaveJobs`` to ``false`` in the configuration file of all the instances of Orthanc acting as readers. A refactoring is needed to improve the core of Orthanc in that respect, for which we are looking for funding from the industry. Some issues reported in our bug tracker call for this refactoring: `issue 83 <https://bugs.orthanc-server.com/show_bug.cgi?id=83>`__, `issue 121 <https://bugs.orthanc-server.com/show_bug.cgi?id=121>`__, `issue 151 <https://bugs.orthanc-server.com/show_bug.cgi?id=151>`__. Latency ^^^^^^^ As of Orthanc 1.7.1, Orthanc still performs quite a large number of small SQL requests. A simple request to a route like ``/studies/{id}`` can trigger 6 SQL queries. This is not an ideal situation and this might be addressed in a future larger DB refactoring (the most time-consuming queries have already been optimized). Given the large number of round-trips between Orthanc and the DB server, it's important that the latency is reduced as much as possible. I.e, if deploying Orthanc in a cloud infrastructure, make sure that the DB server and Orthanc VMs are located in the same datacenter. Typically, a latency of 1-4 ms is expected to have correct performances. If your latency is 20ms, a simple request to ``/studies/{id}`` might spend 120ms in round-trip alone.