Skip to content

[SDK] BatchSpanProcessor: wait for a full batch instead of draining partial batches - #4466

Open
yswdqz wants to merge 4 commits into
open-telemetry:mainfrom
yswdqz:fix/bsp-strict-batch
Open

[SDK] BatchSpanProcessor: wait for a full batch instead of draining partial batches#4466
yswdqz wants to merge 4 commits into
open-telemetry:mainfrom
yswdqz:fix/bsp-strict-batch

Conversation

@yswdqz

@yswdqz yswdqz commented Aug 21, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

fix #4449

Problem

BatchSpanProcessor currently wakes up whenever the buffer is non-empty and
then drains the entire buffer in a tight loop. Under steady load this produces
exports that are much smaller than max_export_batch_size, causing:

  • Up to 2x more gRPC export requests than necessary
  • Higher CPU usage due to repeated serialization and wakeups

Changes

  • Change the worker wait predicate from !buffer_.empty() to
    buffer_.size() >= max_export_batch_size_.
  • Export() now only drains the entire buffer when a force flush is pending
    or the processor is shutting down; on normal wakeups it exports at most one
    batch of max_export_batch_size spans.

This preserves ForceFlush/Shutdown semantics while making the normal
export path strictly batch-oriented.

Performance

I will add it later.

Checklist

  • CHANGELOG.md updated for non-trivial changes
  • Unit tests have been added (No new tests have been added, existing batch_span_processor_test and
    batch_span_processor_test_stress all pass)
  • Changes in public API reviewed (no public API changes;)

@yswdqz
yswdqz requested a review from a team as a code owner August 21, 2026 06:36
@linux-foundation-easycla

linux-foundation-easycla Bot commented Aug 21, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

CLA Signed
The committers listed above are authorized under a signed CLA.

yswdqz added 3 commits August 21, 2026 14:41
…artial batches

- Change the worker wait predicate from '!buffer_.empty()' to

  'buffer_.size() >= max_export_batch_size_'.

- Export() now only drains the entire buffer when a force flush is

  pending or the processor is shutting down; on normal wakeups it

  exports at most one batch of max_export_batch_size spans.

This prevents the processor from waking up and draining partial

trailing batches every time a span arrives, reducing CPU usage and

gRPC request count while preserving ForceFlush/Shutdown drain

semantics.
@yswdqz
yswdqz force-pushed the fix/bsp-strict-batch branch from c49d86c to 3d02bbf Compare August 21, 2026 06:41
@codecov

codecov Bot commented Aug 21, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 82.62%. Comparing base (93f16f3) to head (b3fa617).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #4466      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   82.62%   82.62%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         512      512              
  Lines       20138    20141       +3     
==========================================
+ Hits        16637    16640       +3     
  Misses       3501     3501              
Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
sdk/src/trace/batch_span_processor.cc 85.72% <100.00%> (+0.24%) ⬆️
🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@marcalff

marcalff commented Aug 21, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Thanks for the fix.

Please see clang-format errors, either run clang-format or apply this manually:

diff --git a/sdk/src/trace/batch_span_processor.cc b/sdk/src/trace/batch_span_processor.cc
index 2231b7b..1a1a7d8 100644
--- a/sdk/src/trace/batch_span_processor.cc
+++ b/sdk/src/trace/batch_span_processor.cc
@@ -250,8 +250,8 @@ void BatchSpanProcessor::Export()
 
   std::uint64_t notify_force_flush =
       synchronization_data_->force_flush_pending_sequence.load(std::memory_order_acquire);
-  bool should_drain = notify_force_flush != 0 ||
-                      synchronization_data_->is_shutdown.load(std::memory_order_acquire);
+  bool should_drain =
+      notify_force_flush != 0 || synchronization_data_->is_shutdown.load(std::memory_order_acquire);
 
   do
   {

Comment on lines +253 to +254
bool should_drain = notify_force_flush != 0 ||
synchronization_data_->is_shutdown.load(std::memory_order_acquire);

@denizariyan denizariyan Aug 21, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Export() now only drains the entire buffer when a force flush is pending
or the processor is shutting down; on normal wakeups it exports at most one
batch of max_export_batch_size spans.

notify_force_flush (i.e., synchronization_data_->force_flush_pending_sequence) is a monotonically increasing counter that increases on every call to ForceFlush. This would mean this condition would be permanently true after the first time one calls BatchSpanProcessor::ForceFlush.

Hence while (should_drain) below never becomes while (false), so Export() keeps draining to empty on every call which means the one-batch-per-wakeup behavior this PR adds never takes effect after the first call to BatchSpanProcessor::ForceFlush.

I think something like this would actually solve that problem.

Suggested change
bool should_drain = notify_force_flush != 0 ||
synchronization_data_->is_shutdown.load(std::memory_order_acquire);
bool should_drain =
notify_force_flush >
synchronization_data_->force_flush_notified_sequence.load(std::memory_order_acquire) ||
synchronization_data_->is_shutdown.load(std::memory_order_acquire);

Maybe you could add some tests to confirm/check?

This issue could be tested with a test exporter that records how many spans each Export() call receives and pauses inside the first call, so the worker is held mid-export and you control what's in the buffer when it resumes. You could then add a couple spans while it's paused mid export to see that it will still drain less than the max batch size immediately instead of returning after exporting one batch as the PR suggests IF the BatchSpanProcessor::ForceFlush was ever called.

std::uint64_t notify_force_flush =
synchronization_data_->force_flush_pending_sequence.load(std::memory_order_acquire);
if (notify_force_flush)
if (should_drain)

@ThomsonTan ThomsonTan Aug 21, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

should_drain is doing two orthogonal jobs here: how many records to take, and whether to keep looping. Because is_shutdown alone now sets it, it hands the entire buffer to a single Export() call, bypassing max_export_batch_size. Before this PR, a program that never called ForceFlush had notify_force_flush == 0, so DrainQueue() still chunked; now a backlog of 3000 with max_export_batch_size = 2048 goes out as one 3000-span request instead of 2048 + 952. If the receiver rejects the oversized message (max_receive_message_length defaults to 4 MiB), the spans are already consumed and the result is discarded at the line - and at process exit there is no retry.

Suggest keeping the cap unconditional and letting should_drain control only the loop.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[SDK] BatchSpanProcessor drain the queue in a tight loop instead of waiting for the next full batch

4 participants