What is the fastest way of getting an exact count of rows for a 100GB CSV file stored on Amazon S3 without using Athena nor any Fargate or EC2 VM? I can't use Athena, because the CSV file isn't clean-enough for it. I can't use Fargates or EC2 VMs, because I need a purely serverless solution. I can't use third-party services like Snowflake (native AWS services only).
Also, 100GB is too large to fit within a Lambda Function's /tmp (limited to 10GB). I could try to run something like DuckDB (or any other streaming database engine) on a Lambda and scan the entire file with a SELECT COUNT(*) FROM "s3://myBucket/myFile.csv" query, but the Lambda is quite likely to timeout, because its read bandwidth from S3 is 100MB/s at best, and it cannot run for more than 15 minutes (900s).
I know the approximate size of the file.
Note: I have an inaccurate estimate of the number of rows provided by AWS Glue Data Catalog's crawler, with an error margin of -50%/+100%. This could be used for some kind of iterative or dichotomous process, but I could not figure any out. For example, I tried adding an OFFSET with a value lower than but close to the number of rows to the aforementioned query, but the Lambda running DuckDB timed out. That was disappointing and somewhat surprising, because a query like SELECT * FROM "s3://myBucket/myFile.csv" LIMIT 10 OFFSET 10000000 worked well.
The fastest solution is probably to use SelectObjectContent with ScanRange to parallelize the request on chunks of 50MB or so.
Have you tried "AWS S3 select":https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonS3/latest/userguide/s3-glacier-select-sql-reference-select.html. It lets you run queries on S3 files. I use the service to get basic insight into any file on S3(Provided it can be queried).
Related
I have about 54 000 files in my GCP bucket. When I try to schedule a big query data transfer job to move files from GCP bucket to big query, I am getting the following error:
Error code 9 : Transfer Run limits exceeded. Max size: 15.00 TB. Max file count: 10000. Found: size = 267065994 B (0.00 TB) ; file count = 54824.
I thought the max file count was 10 million.
I think that BigQuery transfer service lists all the files matching the wildcard and then use the list to load them. So it will be same that providing the full list to bq load ... therefore reaching the 10,000 URIs limit.
This is probably necessary because BigQuery transfer service will skip already loaded files, so it needs to look them one by one to decide which to actually load.
I think that your only option is to schedule a job yourself and load them directly into BigQuery. For example using Cloud Composer or writing a little cloud run service that can be invoked by Cloud Scheduler.
The Error message Transfer Run limits exceeded as mentioned before is related to a known limit for Load jobs in BigQuery. Unfortunately this is a hard limit and cannot be changed. There is an ongoing Feature Request to increase this limit but for now there is no ETA for it to be implemented.
The main recommendation for this issue is to split a single operation in multiple processes that will send data in requests that don't exceed this limit. With this we could cover the main question: "Why I see this Error message and how to avoid it?".
Is is normal to ask now "how to automate or perform these actions easier?" I can think of involve more products:
Dataflow, which will help you to process the data that will be added to BigQuery. Here is where you can send multiple requests.
Pub/Sub, will help to listen to events and automate the times where the processing will start.
Please, take a look at this suggested implementation where the aforementioned scenario is wider described.
Hope this is helpful! :)
I want to import a large csv file (around 1gb with 2.5m rows and 50 columns) into a DynamoDb, so have been following this blog from AWS.
However it seems I'm up against a timeout issue. I've got to ~600,000 rows ingested, and it falls over.
I think from reading the CloudWatch log that the timeout is occurring due to the boto3 read on the CSV file (it opens the entire file first, iterates through and batches up for writing)... I tried to reduce the file size (3 columns, 10,000 rows as a test), and I got a timeout after 2500 rows.
Any thoughts here?!
TIA :)
I really appreciate the suggestions (Chris & Jarmod). After trying and failing to break things programmatically into smaller chunks, I decided to look at the approach in general.
Through research I understood there were 4 options:
Lambda Function - as per the above this fails with a timeout.
AWS Pipeline - Doesn't have a template for importing CSV to DynamoDB
Manual Entry - of 2.5m items? no thanks! :)
Use an EC2 instance to load the data to RDS and use DMS to migrate to DynamoDB
The last option actually worked well. Here's what I did:
Create an RDS database (I used the db.t2.micro tier as it was free) and created a blank table.
Create an EC2 instance (free Linux tier) and:
On the EC2 instance: use SCP to upload the CSV file to the ec2 instance
On the EC2 instance: Firstly Sudo yum install MySQL to get the tools needed, then use mysqlimport with the --local option to import the CSV file to the rds MySQL database, which took literally seconds to complete.
At this point I also did some data cleansing to remove some white spaces and some character returns that had crept into the file, just using standard SQL queries.
Using DMS I created a replication instance, endpoints for the source (rds) and target (dynamodb) databases, and finally created a task to import.
The import took around 4hr 30m
After the import, I removed the EC2, RDS, and DMS objects (and associated IAM roles) to avoid any potential costs.
Fortunately, I had a flat structure to do this against, and it was only one table. I needed the cheap speed of the dynamodb, otherwise, I'd have stuck to the RDS (I almost did halfway through the process!!!)
Thanks for reading, and best of luck if you have the same issue in the future.
I was wondering if it would be possible to compose Google Storage Objects (specifically csv files) without headers (i.e. without the row with column names) while using gsutil.
Currently, I can do the following:
gsutil compose gs://bucket/test_file_1.csv gs://bucket/test_file_2.csv gs://bucket/test-composition-files.csv
However, I will be unable to ingest test-composition-files.csv into Google BigQuery because compose blindly appended the files (including the column names).
One possible solution would be to download the file locally and process it with pandas, but this is not ideal for large files.
Is there any way to do this via the CLI? I could not find anything in the docs.
By reading the comment, I think you are spending effort in the wrong way. I understood that you wanted to load your files into big query, but the large number of file prevented you to do this (too many API calls). And dataflow is too slow.
Maybe you can think differently. I have 2 solutions to propose
If you need "near real time" ingestion, and if file size is bellow 1.5Gb, the best way is to build a function which read the file and perform a stream write to BigQuery. This function is triggered by a Cloud Storage event. If there is several file in the same time, several functions will be spawn. Be careful, stream write to BigQuery is not free
If you can wait up to 2 minutes when a file arrive, I recommend you to build a Cloud Functions, triggered every 2 minutes. This function read the file name in a bucket, move them to a sub directory and perform a load job of all the files in the sub directory. You are limited to 1000 load jobs per day (and per table), a day contains 1440 minutes. Batch every 2 minutes you are OK. The load job are free.
Is it acceptable alternatives?
Just a few simple questions on the actual mechanism behind reading a file on s3 into an EMR cluster with Spark:
Does spark.read.format("com.databricks.spark.csv").load("s3://my/dataset/").where($"state" === "WA") communicate the whole dataset into the EMR cluster's local HDFS and then perform the filter after? Or does it filter records when bringing the dataset into the cluster? Or does it do neither? If this is the case, what's actually happening?
The official documentation lacks an explanation of what's going on (or if it does have an explanation, I cannot find it). Can someone explain, or link to a resource with such an explanation?
I can't speak for the closed source AWS one, but the ASF s3a: connector does its work in S3AInputStream
Reading data is via HTTPS, which has slow startup time, and if you need to stop the download before the GET is finished, forces you to abort the TCP stream and create a new one.
To keep this cost down the code has features like
Lazy seek: when you do a seek(), it updates its internal pointer but doesn't issue a new GET until you actually do a read.
chooses whether to abort() vs read to end on a GET based on how much is left
Has 3 IO modes:
"sequential", GET content range is from (pos, EOF). Best bandwidth, worst performance on seek. For: CSV, .gz, ...
"random": small GETs, min(block-size, length(read)). Best for columnar data (ORC, Parquet) compressed in a seekable format (snappy)
"adaptive" (new last week, based on some work from microsoft on the Azure WASB connector). Starts off sequential, as soon as you do a backwards seek switches to random IO
Code is all there, improvements welcome. The current perf work (especially random IO) based on TPC-DS benchmarking of ORC data on Hive, BTW)
Assuming you are reading CSV and filtering there, it'll be reading the entire CSV file and filtering. This is horribly inefficient for large files. Best to import into a column format and use predicate pushdown for the layers below to seek round the file for filtering and reading columns
Loading data from S3 (s3://-) usually goes via EMRFS in EMR
EMRFS directly access S3 (not via HDFS)
When Spark loads data from S3, they are stored as DataSet in the cluster according to StorageLevel(memory or disk)
Finally, Spark filters loaded data
When you specify files located on S3 they are read into the cluster. The processing happens on the cluster nodes.
However, this may be changing with S3 Select, which is now in preview.
I'm executing a query in AWS Athena and writing the results to s3. It seems like it's taking a long time (way too long in fact) for the file to be available when I execute the query from a lambda script.
I'm scanning 70MB of data, and the file returned is 12MB. I execute this from a lambda script like so:
athena_client = boto3.client('athena')
athena_client.start_query_execution(
QueryString=query_string,
ResultConfiguration={
'OutputLocation': 'location_on_s3',
'EncryptionConfiguration': 'SSE_S3',
}
)
If I run the query directly in Athena it takes 2.97 seconds to run. However it looks like the file is available after 2 minutes if I run this query from the lambda script.
Does anyone know the write performance of AWS Athena to AWS S3? I would like to know if this is normal. The docs don't state how quickly the write occurs.
Every query in Athena writes to S3.
If you check the History tab on the Athena page in the console you'll see a history of all queries you've run (not just through the console, but generally). Each of those has a link to a download path.
If you click the Settings button a dialog will open asking you to specify an output location. Check that location and you'll find all your query results there.
Why is this taking so much longer from your Lambda script? I'm guessing, but the only possible suggestion I have is that you're querying across regions - if your data is in your region and your result location is in another location you might experience slowness due to transfer cost. Even so, 12MB should be fast.