Tag Archives: 629

Congratulations to Oracle on MySQL 8.0

Post Syndicated from Michael "Monty" Widenius original http://monty-says.blogspot.com/2018/04/congratulations-to-oracle-on-mysql-80.html

Last week, Oracle announced the general availability of MySQL 8.0. This is good news for database users, as it means Oracle is still developing MySQL.

I decide to celebrate the event by doing a quick test of MySQL 8.0. Here follows a step-by-step description of my first experience with MySQL 8.0.
Note that I did the following without reading the release notes, as is what I have done with every MySQL / MariaDB release up to date; In this case it was not the right thing to do.

I pulled MySQL 8.0 from [email protected]:mysql/mysql-server.git
I was pleasantly surprised that ‘cmake . ; make‘ worked without without any compiler warnings! I even checked the used compiler options and noticed that MySQL was compiled with -Wall + several other warning flags. Good job MySQL team!

I did have a little trouble finding the mysqld binary as Oracle had moved it to ‘runtime_output_directory’; Unexpected, but no big thing.

Now it’s was time to install MySQL 8.0.

I did know that MySQL 8.0 has removed mysql_install_db, so I had to use the mysqld binary directly to install the default databases:
(I have specified datadir=/my/data3 in the /tmp/my.cnf file)

> cd runtime_output_directory
> mkdir /my/data3
> ./mysqld –defaults-file=/tmp/my.cnf –install

2018-04-22T12:38:18.332967Z 1 [ERROR] [MY-011011] [Server] Failed to find valid data directory.
2018-04-22T12:38:18.333109Z 0 [ERROR] [MY-010020] [Server] Data Dictionary initialization failed.
2018-04-22T12:38:18.333135Z 0 [ERROR] [MY-010119] [Server] Aborting

A quick look in mysqld –help –verbose output showed that the right command option is –-initialize. My bad, lets try again,

> ./mysqld –defaults-file=/tmp/my.cnf –initialize

2018-04-22T12:39:31.910509Z 0 [ERROR] [MY-010457] [Server] –initialize specified but the data directory has files in it. Aborting.
2018-04-22T12:39:31.910578Z 0 [ERROR] [MY-010119] [Server] Aborting

Now I used the right options, but still didn’t work.
I took a quick look around:

> ls /my/data3/
binlog.index

So even if the mysqld noticed that the data3 directory was wrong, it still wrote things into it.  This even if I didn’t have –log-binlog enabled in the my.cnf file. Strange, but easy to fix:

> rm /my/data3/binlog.index
> ./mysqld –defaults-file=/tmp/my.cnf –initialize

2018-04-22T12:40:45.633637Z 0 [ERROR] [MY-011071] [Server] unknown variable ‘max-tmp-tables=100’
2018-04-22T12:40:45.633657Z 0 [Warning] [MY-010952] [Server] The privilege system failed to initialize correctly. If you have upgraded your server, make sure you’re executing mysql_upgrade to correct the issue.
2018-04-22T12:40:45.633663Z 0 [ERROR] [MY-010119] [Server] Aborting

The warning about the privilege system confused me a bit, but I ignored it for the time being and removed from my configuration files the variables that MySQL 8.0 doesn’t support anymore. I couldn’t find a list of the removed variables anywhere so this was done with the trial and error method.

> ./mysqld –defaults-file=/tmp/my.cnf

2018-04-22T12:42:56.626583Z 0 [ERROR] [MY-010735] [Server] Can’t open the mysql.plugin table. Please run mysql_upgrade to create it.
2018-04-22T12:42:56.827685Z 0 [Warning] [MY-010015] [Repl] Gtid table is not ready to be used. Table ‘mysql.gtid_executed’ cannot be opened.
2018-04-22T12:42:56.838501Z 0 [Warning] [MY-010068] [Server] CA certificate ca.pem is self signed.
2018-04-22T12:42:56.848375Z 0 [Warning] [MY-010441] [Server] Failed to open optimizer cost constant tables
2018-04-22T12:42:56.848863Z 0 [ERROR] [MY-013129] [Server] A message intended for a client cannot be sent there as no client-session is attached. Therefore, we’re sending the information to the error-log instead: MY-001146 – Table ‘mysql.component’ doesn’t exist
2018-04-22T12:42:56.848916Z 0 [Warning] [MY-013129] [Server] A message intended for a client cannot be sent there as no client-session is attached. Therefore, we’re sending the information to the error-log instead: MY-003543 – The mysql.component table is missing or has an incorrect definition.
….
2018-04-22T12:42:56.854141Z 0 [System] [MY-010931] [Server] /home/my/mysql-8.0/runtime_output_directory/mysqld: ready for connections. Version: ‘8.0.11’ socket: ‘/tmp/mysql.sock’ port: 3306 Source distribution.

I figured out that if there is a single wrong variable in the configuration file, running mysqld –initialize will leave the database in an inconsistent state. NOT GOOD! I am happy I didn’t try this in a production system!

Time to start over from the beginning:

> rm -r /my/data3/*
> ./mysqld –defaults-file=/tmp/my.cnf –initialize

2018-04-22T12:44:45.548960Z 5 [Note] [MY-010454] [Server] A temporary password is generated for [email protected]: px)NaaSp?6um
2018-04-22T12:44:51.221751Z 0 [System] [MY-013170] [Server] /home/my/mysql-8.0/runtime_output_directory/mysqld (mysqld 8.0.11) initializing of server has completed

Success!

I wonder why the temporary password is so complex; It could easily have been something that one could easily remember without decreasing security, it’s temporary after all. No big deal, one can always paste it from the logs. (Side note: MariaDB uses socket authentication on many system and thus doesn’t need temporary installation passwords).

Now lets start the MySQL server for real to do some testing:

> ./mysqld –defaults-file=/tmp/my.cnf

2018-04-22T12:45:43.683484Z 0 [System] [MY-010931] [Server] /home/my/mysql-8.0/runtime_output_directory/mysqld: ready for connections. Version: ‘8.0.11’ socket: ‘/tmp/mysql.sock’ port: 3306 Source distribution.

And the lets start the client:

> ./client/mysql –socket=/tmp/mysql.sock –user=root –password=”px)NaaSp?6um”
ERROR 2059 (HY000): Plugin caching_sha2_password could not be loaded: /usr/local/mysql/lib/plugin/caching_sha2_password.so: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory

Apparently MySQL 8.0 doesn’t work with old MySQL / MariaDB clients by default 🙁

I was testing this in a system with MariaDB installed, like all modern Linux system today, and didn’t want to use the MySQL clients or libraries.

I decided to try to fix this by changing the authentication to the native (original) MySQL authentication method.

> mysqld –skip-grant-tables

> ./client/mysql –socket=/tmp/mysql.sock –user=root
ERROR 1045 (28000): Access denied for user ‘root’@’localhost’ (using password: NO)

Apparently –skip-grant-tables is not good enough anymore. Let’s try again with:

> mysqld –skip-grant-tables –default_authentication_plugin=mysql_native_password

> ./client/mysql –socket=/tmp/mysql.sock –user=root mysql
Welcome to the MariaDB monitor. Commands end with ; or \g.
Your MySQL connection id is 7
Server version: 8.0.11 Source distribution

Great, we are getting somewhere, now lets fix “root”  to work with the old authenticaion:

MySQL [mysql]> update mysql.user set plugin=”mysql_native_password”,authentication_string=password(“test”) where user=”root”;
ERROR 1064 (42000): You have an error in your SQL syntax; check the manual that corresponds to your MySQL server version for the right syntax to use near ‘(“test”) where user=”root”‘ at line 1

A quick look in the MySQL 8.0 release notes told me that the PASSWORD() function is removed in 8.0. Why???? I don’t know how one in MySQL 8.0 is supposed to generate passwords compatible with old installations of MySQL. One could of course start an old MySQL or MariaDB version, execute the password() function and copy the result.

I decided to fix this the easy way and use an empty password:

(Update:: I later discovered that the right way would have been to use: FLUSH PRIVILEGES;  ALTER USER’ root’@’localhost’ identified by ‘test’  ; I however dislike this syntax as it has the password in clear text which is easy to grab and the command can’t be used to easily update the mysql.user table. One must also disable the –skip-grant mode to do use this)

MySQL [mysql]> update mysql.user set plugin=”mysql_native_password”,authentication_string=”” where user=”root”;
Query OK, 1 row affected (0.077 sec)
Rows matched: 1 Changed: 1 Warnings: 0
 
I restarted mysqld:
> mysqld –default_authentication_plugin=mysql_native_password

> ./client/mysql –user=root –password=”” mysql
ERROR 1862 (HY000): Your password has expired. To log in you must change it using a client that supports expired passwords.

Ouch, forgot that. Lets try again:

> mysqld –skip-grant-tables –default_authentication_plugin=mysql_native_password

> ./client/mysql –user=root –password=”” mysql
MySQL [mysql]> update mysql.user set password_expired=”N” where user=”root”;

Now restart and test worked:

> ./mysqld –default_authentication_plugin=mysql_native_password

>./client/mysql –user=root –password=”” mysql

Finally I had a working account that I can use to create other users!

When looking at mysqld –help –verbose again. I noticed the option:

–initialize-insecure
Create the default database and exit. Create a super user
with empty password.

I decided to check if this would have made things easier:

> rm -r /my/data3/*
> ./mysqld –defaults-file=/tmp/my.cnf –initialize-insecure

2018-04-22T13:18:06.629548Z 5 [Warning] [MY-010453] [Server] [email protected] is created with an empty password ! Please consider switching off the –initialize-insecure option.

Hm. Don’t understand the warning as–initialize-insecure is not an option that one would use more than one time and thus nothing one would ‘switch off’.

> ./mysqld –defaults-file=/tmp/my.cnf

> ./client/mysql –user=root –password=”” mysql
ERROR 2059 (HY000): Plugin caching_sha2_password could not be loaded: /usr/local/mysql/lib/plugin/caching_sha2_password.so: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory

Back to the beginning 🙁

To get things to work with old clients, one has to initialize the database with:
> ./mysqld –defaults-file=/tmp/my.cnf –initialize-insecure –default_authentication_plugin=mysql_native_password

Now I finally had MySQL 8.0 up and running and thought I would take it up for a spin by running the “standard” MySQL/MariaDB sql-bench test suite. This was removed in MySQL 5.7, but as I happened to have MariaDB 10.3 installed, I decided to run it from there.

sql-bench is a single threaded benchmark that measures the “raw” speed for some common operations. It gives you the ‘maximum’ performance for a single query. Its different from other benchmarks that measures the maximum throughput when you have a lot of users, but sql-bench still tells you a lot about what kind of performance to expect from the database.

I tried first to be clever and create the “test” database, that I needed for sql-bench, with
> mkdir /my/data3/test

but when I tried to run the benchmark, MySQL 8.0 complained that the test database didn’t exist.

MySQL 8.0 has gone away from the original concept of MySQL where the user can easily
create directories and copy databases into the database directory. This may have serious
implication for anyone doing backup of databases and/or trying to restore a backup with normal OS commands.

I created the ‘test’ database with mysqladmin and then tried to run sql-bench:

> ./run-all-tests –user=root

The first run failed in test-ATIS:

Can’t execute command ‘create table class_of_service (class_code char(2) NOT NULL,rank tinyint(2) NOT NULL,class_description char(80) NOT NULL,PRIMARY KEY (class_code))’
Error: You have an error in your SQL syntax; check the manual that corresponds to your MySQL server version for the right syntax to use near ‘rank tinyint(2) NOT NULL,class_description char(80) NOT NULL,PRIMARY KEY (class_’ at line 1

This happened because ‘rank‘ is now a reserved word in MySQL 8.0. This is also reserved in ANSI SQL, but I don’t know of any other database that has failed to run test-ATIS before. I have in the past run it against Oracle, PostgreSQL, Mimer, MSSQL etc without any problems.

MariaDB also has ‘rank’ as a keyword in 10.2 and 10.3 but one can still use it as an identifier.

I fixed test-ATIS and then managed to run all tests on MySQL 8.0.

I did run the test both with MySQL 8.0 and MariaDB 10.3 with the InnoDB storage engine and by having identical values for all InnoDB variables, table-definition-cache and table-open-cache. I turned off performance schema for both databases. All test are run with a user with an empty password (to keep things comparable and because it’s was too complex to generate a password in MySQL 8.0)

The result are as follows
Results per test in seconds:

Operation         |MariaDB|MySQL-8|

———————————–
ATIS              | 153.00| 228.00|
alter-table       |  92.00| 792.00|
big-tables        | 990.00|2079.00|
connect           | 186.00| 227.00|
create            | 575.00|4465.00|
insert            |4552.00|8458.00|
select            | 333.00| 412.00|
table-elimination |1900.00|3916.00|
wisconsin         | 272.00| 590.00|
———————————–

This is of course just a first view of the performance of MySQL 8.0 in a single user environment. Some reflections about the results:

  • Alter-table test is slower (as expected) in 8.0 as some of the alter tests benefits of the instant add column in MariaDB 10.3.
  • connect test is also better for MariaDB as we put a lot of efforts to speed this up in MariaDB 10.2
  • table-elimination shows an optimization in MariaDB for the  Anchor table model, which MySQL doesn’t have.
  • CREATE and DROP TABLE is almost 8 times slower in MySQL 8.0 than in MariaDB 10.3. I assume this is the cost of ‘atomic DDL’. This may also cause performance problems for any thread using the data dictionary when another thread is creating/dropping tables.
  • When looking at the individual test results, MySQL 8.0 was slower in almost every test, in many significantly slower.
  • The only test where MySQL was faster was “update_with_key_prefix”. I checked this and noticed that there was a bug in the test and the columns was updated to it’s original value (which should be instant with any storage engine). This is an old bug that MySQL has found and fixed and that we have not been aware of in the test or in MariaDB.
  • While writing this, I noticed that MySQL 8.0 is now using utf8mb4 as the default character set instead of latin1. This may affect some of the benchmarks slightly (not much as most tests works with numbers and Oracle claims that utf8mb4 is only 20% slower than latin1), but needs to be verified.
  • Oracle claims that MySQL 8.0 is much faster on multi user benchmarks. The above test indicates that they may have done this by sacrificing single user performance.
  •  We need to do more and many different benchmarks to better understand exactly what is going on. Stay tuned!

Short summary of my first run with MySQL 8.0:

  • Using the new caching_sha2_password authentication as default for new installation is likely to cause a lot of problems for users. No old application will be able to use MySQL 8.0, installed with default options, without moving to MySQL’s client libraries. While working on this blog I saw MySQL users complain on IRC that not even MySQL Workbench can authenticate with MySQL 8.0. This is the first time in MySQL’s history where such an incompatible change has ever been done!
  • Atomic DDL is a good thing (We plan to have this in MariaDB 10.4), but it should not have such a drastic impact on performance. I am also a bit skeptical of MySQL 8.0 having just one copy of the data dictionary as if this gets corrupted you will lose all your data. (Single point of failure)
  • MySQL 8.0 has several new reserved words and has removed a lot of variables, which makes upgrades hard. Before upgrading to MySQL 8.0 one has to check all one’s databases and applications to ensure that there are no conflicts.
  • As my test above shows, if you have a single deprecated variable in your configuration files, the installation of MySQL will abort and can leave the database in inconsistent state. I did of course my tests by installing into an empty data dictionary, but one can assume that some of the problems may also happen when upgrading an old installation.

Conclusions:
In many ways, MySQL 8.0 has caught up with some earlier versions of MariaDB. For instance, in MariaDB 10.0, we introduced roles (four years ago). In MariaDB 10.1, we introduced encrypted redo/undo logs (three years ago). In MariaDB 10.2, we introduced window functions and CTEs (a year ago). However, some catch-up of MariaDB Server 10.2 features still remains for MySQL (such as check constraints, binlog compression, and log-based rollback).

MySQL 8.0 has a few new interesting features (mostly Atomic DDL and JSON TABLE functions), but at the same time MySQL has strayed away from some of the fundamental corner stone principles of MySQL:

From the start of the first version of MySQL in 1995, all development has been focused around 3 core principles:

  • Ease of use
  • Performance
  • Stability

With MySQL 8.0, Oracle has sacrifices 2 of 3 of these.

In addition (as part of ease of use), while I was working on MySQL, we did our best to ensure that the following should hold:

  • Upgrades should be trivial
  • Things should be kept compatible, if possible (don’t remove features/options/functions that are used)
  • Minimize reserved words, don’t remove server variables
  • One should be able to use normal OS commands to create and drop databases, copy and move tables around within the same system or between different systems. With 8.0 and data dictionary taking backups of specific tables will be hard, even if the server is not running.
  • mysqldump should always be usable backups and to move to new releases
  • Old clients and application should be able to use ‘any’ MySQL server version unchanged. (Some Oracle client libraries, like C++, by default only supports the new X protocol and can thus not be used with older MySQL or any MariaDB version)

We plan to add a data dictionary to MariaDB 10.4 or MariaDB 10.5, but in a way to not sacrifice any of the above principles!

The competition between MySQL and MariaDB is not just about a tactical arms race on features. It’s about design philosophy, or strategic vision, if you will.

This shows in two main ways: our respective view of the Storage Engine structure, and of the top-level direction of the roadmap.

On the Storage Engine side, MySQL is converging on InnoDB, even for clustering and partitioning. In doing so, they are abandoning the advantages of multiple ways of storing data. By contrast, MariaDB sees lots of value in the Storage Engine architecture: MariaDB Server 10.3 will see the general availability of MyRocks (for write-intensive workloads) and Spider (for scalable workloads). On top of that, we have ColumnStore for analytical workloads. One can use the CONNECT engine to join with other databases. The use of different storage engines for different workloads and different hardware is a competitive differentiator, now more than ever.

On the roadmap side, MySQL is carefully steering clear of features that close the gap between MySQL and Oracle. MariaDB has no such constraints. With MariaDB 10.3, we are introducing PL/SQL compatibility (Oracle’s stored procedures) and AS OF (built-in system versioned tables with point-in-time querying). For both of those features, MariaDB is the first Open Source database doing so. I don’t except Oracle to provide any of the above features in MySQL!

Also on the roadmap side, MySQL is not working with the ecosystem in extending the functionality. In 2017, MariaDB accepted more code contributions in one year, than MySQL has done during its entire lifetime, and the rate is increasing!

I am sure that the experience I had with testing MySQL 8.0 would have been significantly better if MySQL would have an open development model where the community could easily participate in developing and testing MySQL continuously. Most of the confusing error messages and strange behavior would have been found and fixed long before the GA release.

Before upgrading to MySQL 8.0 please read https://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/8.0/en/upgrading-from-previous-series.html to see what problems you can run into! Don’t expect that old installations or applications will work out of the box without testing as a lot of features and options has been removed (query cache, partition of myisam tables etc)! You probably also have to revise your backup methods, especially if you want to ever restore just a few tables. (With 8.0, I don’t know how this can be easily done).

According to the MySQL 8.0 release notes, one can’t use mysqldump to copy a database to MySQL 8.0. One has to first to move to a MySQL 5.7 GA version (with mysqldump, as recommended by Oracle) and then to MySQL 8.0 with in-place update. I assume this means that all old mysqldump backups are useless for MySQL 8.0?

MySQL 8.0 seams to be a one way street to an unknown future. Up to MySQL 5.7 it has been trivial to move to MariaDB and one could always move back to MySQL with mysqldump. All MySQL client libraries has worked with MariaDB and all MariaDB client libraries has worked with MySQL. With MySQL 8.0 this has changed in the wrong direction.

As long as you are using MySQL 5.7 and below you have choices for your future, after MySQL 8.0 you have very little choice. But don’t despair, as MariaDB will always be able to load a mysqldump file and it’s very easy to upgrade your old MySQL installation to MariaDB 🙂

I wish you good luck to try MySQL 8.0 (and also the upcoming MariaDB 10.3)!

Managing AWS Lambda Function Concurrency

Post Syndicated from Chris Munns original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/compute/managing-aws-lambda-function-concurrency/

One of the key benefits of serverless applications is the ease in which they can scale to meet traffic demands or requests, with little to no need for capacity planning. In AWS Lambda, which is the core of the serverless platform at AWS, the unit of scale is a concurrent execution. This refers to the number of executions of your function code that are happening at any given time.

Thinking about concurrent executions as a unit of scale is a fairly unique concept. In this post, I dive deeper into this and talk about how you can make use of per function concurrency limits in Lambda.

Understanding concurrency in Lambda

Instead of diving right into the guts of how Lambda works, here’s an appetizing analogy: a magical pizza.
Yes, a magical pizza!

This magical pizza has some unique properties:

  • It has a fixed maximum number of slices, such as 8.
  • Slices automatically re-appear after they are consumed.
  • When you take a slice from the pizza, it does not re-appear until it has been completely consumed.
  • One person can take multiple slices at a time.
  • You can easily ask to have the number of slices increased, but they remain fixed at any point in time otherwise.

Now that the magical pizza’s properties are defined, here’s a hypothetical situation of some friends sharing this pizza.

Shawn, Kate, Daniela, Chuck, Ian and Avleen get together every Friday to share a pizza and catch up on their week. As there is just six of them, they can easily all enjoy a slice of pizza at a time. As they finish each slice, it re-appears in the pizza pan and they can take another slice again. Given the magical properties of their pizza, they can continue to eat all they want, but with two very important constraints:

  • If any of them take too many slices at once, the others may not get as much as they want.
  • If they take too many slices, they might also eat too much and get sick.

One particular week, some of the friends are hungrier than the rest, taking two slices at a time instead of just one. If more than two of them try to take two pieces at a time, this can cause contention for pizza slices. Some of them would wait hungry for the slices to re-appear. They could ask for a pizza with more slices, but then run the same risk again later if more hungry friends join than planned for.

What can they do?

If the friends agreed to accept a limit for the maximum number of slices they each eat concurrently, both of these issues are avoided. Some could have a maximum of 2 of the 8 slices, or other concurrency limits that were more or less. Just so long as they kept it at or under eight total slices to be eaten at one time. This would keep any from going hungry or eating too much. The six friends can happily enjoy their magical pizza without worry!

Concurrency in Lambda

Concurrency in Lambda actually works similarly to the magical pizza model. Each AWS Account has an overall AccountLimit value that is fixed at any point in time, but can be easily increased as needed, just like the count of slices in the pizza. As of May 2017, the default limit is 1000 “slices” of concurrency per AWS Region.

Also like the magical pizza, each concurrency “slice” can only be consumed individually one at a time. After consumption, it becomes available to be consumed again. Services invoking Lambda functions can consume multiple slices of concurrency at the same time, just like the group of friends can take multiple slices of the pizza.

Let’s take our example of the six friends and bring it back to AWS services that commonly invoke Lambda:

  • Amazon S3
  • Amazon Kinesis
  • Amazon DynamoDB
  • Amazon Cognito

In a single account with the default concurrency limit of 1000 concurrent executions, any of these four services could invoke enough functions to consume the entire limit or some part of it. Just like with the pizza example, there is the possibility for two issues to pop up:

  • One or more of these services could invoke enough functions to consume a majority of the available concurrency capacity. This could cause others to be starved for it, causing failed invocations.
  • A service could consume too much concurrent capacity and cause a downstream service or database to be overwhelmed, which could cause failed executions.

For Lambda functions that are launched in a VPC, you have the potential to consume the available IP addresses in a subnet or the maximum number of elastic network interfaces to which your account has access. For more information, see Configuring a Lambda Function to Access Resources in an Amazon VPC. For information about elastic network interface limits, see Network Interfaces section in the Amazon VPC Limits topic.

One way to solve both of these problems is applying a concurrency limit to the Lambda functions in an account.

Configuring per function concurrency limits

You can now set a concurrency limit on individual Lambda functions in an account. The concurrency limit that you set reserves a portion of your account level concurrency for a given function. All of your functions’ concurrent executions count against this account-level limit by default.

If you set a concurrency limit for a specific function, then that function’s concurrency limit allocation is deducted from the shared pool and assigned to that specific function. AWS also reserves 100 units of concurrency for all functions that don’t have a specified concurrency limit set. This helps to make sure that future functions have capacity to be consumed.

Going back to the example of the consuming services, you could set throttles for the functions as follows:

Amazon S3 function = 350
Amazon Kinesis function = 200
Amazon DynamoDB function = 200
Amazon Cognito function = 150
Total = 900

With the 100 reserved for all non-concurrency reserved functions, this totals the account limit of 1000.

Here’s how this works. To start, create a basic Lambda function that is invoked via Amazon API Gateway. This Lambda function returns a single “Hello World” statement with an added sleep time between 2 and 5 seconds. The sleep time simulates an API providing some sort of capability that can take a varied amount of time. The goal here is to show how an API that is underloaded can reach its concurrency limit, and what happens when it does.
To create the example function

  1. Open the Lambda console.
  2. Choose Create Function.
  3. For Author from scratch, enter the following values:
    1. For Name, enter a value (such as concurrencyBlog01).
    2. For Runtime, choose Python 3.6.
    3. For Role, choose Create new role from template and enter a name aligned with this function, such as concurrencyBlogRole.
  4. Choose Create function.
  5. The function is created with some basic example code. Replace that code with the following:

import time
from random import randint
seconds = randint(2, 5)

def lambda_handler(event, context):
time.sleep(seconds)
return {"statusCode": 200,
"body": ("Hello world, slept " + str(seconds) + " seconds"),
"headers":
{
"Access-Control-Allow-Headers": "Content-Type,X-Amz-Date,Authorization,X-Api-Key,X-Amz-Security-Token",
"Access-Control-Allow-Methods": "GET,OPTIONS",
}}

  1. Under Basic settings, set Timeout to 10 seconds. While this function should only ever take up to 5-6 seconds (with the 5-second max sleep), this gives you a little bit of room if it takes longer.

  1. Choose Save at the top right.

At this point, your function is configured for this example. Test it and confirm this in the console:

  1. Choose Test.
  2. Enter a name (it doesn’t matter for this example).
  3. Choose Create.
  4. In the console, choose Test again.
  5. You should see output similar to the following:

Now configure API Gateway so that you have an HTTPS endpoint to test against.

  1. In the Lambda console, choose Configuration.
  2. Under Triggers, choose API Gateway.
  3. Open the API Gateway icon now shown as attached to your Lambda function:

  1. Under Configure triggers, leave the default values for API Name and Deployment stage. For Security, choose Open.
  2. Choose Add, Save.

API Gateway is now configured to invoke Lambda at the Invoke URL shown under its configuration. You can take this URL and test it in any browser or command line, using tools such as “curl”:


$ curl https://ofixul557l.execute-api.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/prod/concurrencyBlog01
Hello world, slept 2 seconds

Throwing load at the function

Now start throwing some load against your API Gateway + Lambda function combo. Right now, your function is only limited by the total amount of concurrency available in an account. For this example account, you might have 850 unreserved concurrency out of a full account limit of 1000 due to having configured a few concurrency limits already (also the 100 concurrency saved for all functions without configured limits). You can find all of this information on the main Dashboard page of the Lambda console:

For generating load in this example, use an open source tool called “hey” (https://github.com/rakyll/hey), which works similarly to ApacheBench (ab). You test from an Amazon EC2 instance running the default Amazon Linux AMI from the EC2 console. For more help with configuring an EC2 instance, follow the steps in the Launch Instance Wizard.

After the EC2 instance is running, SSH into the host and run the following:


sudo yum install go
go get -u github.com/rakyll/hey

“hey” is easy to use. For these tests, specify a total number of tests (5,000) and a concurrency of 50 against the API Gateway URL as follows(replace the URL here with your own):


$ ./go/bin/hey -n 5000 -c 50 https://ofixul557l.execute-api.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/prod/concurrencyBlog01

The output from “hey” tells you interesting bits of information:


$ ./go/bin/hey -n 5000 -c 50 https://ofixul557l.execute-api.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/prod/concurrencyBlog01

Summary:
Total: 381.9978 secs
Slowest: 9.4765 secs
Fastest: 0.0438 secs
Average: 3.2153 secs
Requests/sec: 13.0891
Total data: 140024 bytes
Size/request: 28 bytes

Response time histogram:
0.044 [1] |
0.987 [2] |
1.930 [0] |
2.874 [1803] |∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎
3.817 [1518] |∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎
4.760 [719] |∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎
5.703 [917] |∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎
6.647 [13] |
7.590 [14] |
8.533 [9] |
9.477 [4] |

Latency distribution:
10% in 2.0224 secs
25% in 2.0267 secs
50% in 3.0251 secs
75% in 4.0269 secs
90% in 5.0279 secs
95% in 5.0414 secs
99% in 5.1871 secs

Details (average, fastest, slowest):
DNS+dialup: 0.0003 secs, 0.0000 secs, 0.0332 secs
DNS-lookup: 0.0000 secs, 0.0000 secs, 0.0046 secs
req write: 0.0000 secs, 0.0000 secs, 0.0005 secs
resp wait: 3.2149 secs, 0.0438 secs, 9.4472 secs
resp read: 0.0000 secs, 0.0000 secs, 0.0004 secs

Status code distribution:
[200] 4997 responses
[502] 3 responses

You can see a helpful histogram and latency distribution. Remember that this Lambda function has a random sleep period in it and so isn’t entirely representational of a real-life workload. Those three 502s warrant digging deeper, but could be due to Lambda cold-start timing and the “second” variable being the maximum of 5, causing the Lambda functions to time out. AWS X-Ray and the Amazon CloudWatch logs generated by both API Gateway and Lambda could help you troubleshoot this.

Configuring a concurrency reservation

Now that you’ve established that you can generate this load against the function, I show you how to limit it and protect a backend resource from being overloaded by all of these requests.

  1. In the console, choose Configure.
  2. Under Concurrency, for Reserve concurrency, enter 25.

  1. Click on Save in the top right corner.

You could also set this with the AWS CLI using the Lambda put-function-concurrency command or see your current concurrency configuration via Lambda get-function. Here’s an example command:


$ aws lambda get-function --function-name concurrencyBlog01 --output json --query Concurrency
{
"ReservedConcurrentExecutions": 25
}

Either way, you’ve set the Concurrency Reservation to 25 for this function. This acts as both a limit and a reservation in terms of making sure that you can execute 25 concurrent functions at all times. Going above this results in the throttling of the Lambda function. Depending on the invoking service, throttling can result in a number of different outcomes, as shown in the documentation on Throttling Behavior. This change has also reduced your unreserved account concurrency for other functions by 25.

Rerun the same load generation as before and see what happens. Previously, you tested at 50 concurrency, which worked just fine. By limiting the Lambda functions to 25 concurrency, you should see rate limiting kick in. Run the same test again:


$ ./go/bin/hey -n 5000 -c 50 https://ofixul557l.execute-api.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/prod/concurrencyBlog01

While this test runs, refresh the Monitoring tab on your function detail page. You see the following warning message:

This is great! It means that your throttle is working as configured and you are now protecting your downstream resources from too much load from your Lambda function.

Here is the output from a new “hey” command:


$ ./go/bin/hey -n 5000 -c 50 https://ofixul557l.execute-api.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/prod/concurrencyBlog01
Summary:
Total: 379.9922 secs
Slowest: 7.1486 secs
Fastest: 0.0102 secs
Average: 1.1897 secs
Requests/sec: 13.1582
Total data: 164608 bytes
Size/request: 32 bytes

Response time histogram:
0.010 [1] |
0.724 [3075] |∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎
1.438 [0] |
2.152 [811] |∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎∎
2.866 [11] |
3.579 [566] |∎∎∎∎∎∎∎
4.293 [214] |∎∎∎
5.007 [1] |
5.721 [315] |∎∎∎∎
6.435 [4] |
7.149 [2] |

Latency distribution:
10% in 0.0130 secs
25% in 0.0147 secs
50% in 0.0205 secs
75% in 2.0344 secs
90% in 4.0229 secs
95% in 5.0248 secs
99% in 5.0629 secs

Details (average, fastest, slowest):
DNS+dialup: 0.0004 secs, 0.0000 secs, 0.0537 secs
DNS-lookup: 0.0002 secs, 0.0000 secs, 0.0184 secs
req write: 0.0000 secs, 0.0000 secs, 0.0016 secs
resp wait: 1.1892 secs, 0.0101 secs, 7.1038 secs
resp read: 0.0000 secs, 0.0000 secs, 0.0005 secs

Status code distribution:
[502] 3076 responses
[200] 1924 responses

This looks fairly different from the last load test run. A large percentage of these requests failed fast due to the concurrency throttle failing them (those with the 0.724 seconds line). The timing shown here in the histogram represents the entire time it took to get a response between the EC2 instance and API Gateway calling Lambda and being rejected. It’s also important to note that this example was configured with an edge-optimized endpoint in API Gateway. You see under Status code distribution that 3076 of the 5000 requests failed with a 502, showing that the backend service from API Gateway and Lambda failed the request.

Other uses

Managing function concurrency can be useful in a few other ways beyond just limiting the impact on downstream services and providing a reservation of concurrency capacity. Here are two other uses:

  • Emergency kill switch
  • Cost controls

Emergency kill switch

On occasion, due to issues with applications I’ve managed in the past, I’ve had a need to disable a certain function or capability of an application. By setting the concurrency reservation and limit of a Lambda function to zero, you can do just that.

With the reservation set to zero every invocation of a Lambda function results in being throttled. You could then work on the related parts of the infrastructure or application that aren’t working, and then reconfigure the concurrency limit to allow invocations again.

Cost controls

While I mentioned how you might want to use concurrency limits to control the downstream impact to services or databases that your Lambda function might call, another resource that you might be cautious about is money. Setting the concurrency throttle is another way to help control costs during development and testing of your application.

You might want to prevent against a function performing a recursive action too quickly or a development workload generating too high of a concurrency. You might also want to protect development resources connected to this function from generating too much cost, such as APIs that your Lambda function calls.

Conclusion

Concurrent executions as a unit of scale are a fairly unique characteristic about Lambda functions. Placing limits on how many concurrency “slices” that your function can consume can prevent a single function from consuming all of the available concurrency in an account. Limits can also prevent a function from overwhelming a backend resource that isn’t as scalable.

Unlike monolithic applications or even microservices where there are mixed capabilities in a single service, Lambda functions encourage a sort of “nano-service” of small business logic directly related to the integration model connected to the function. I hope you’ve enjoyed this post and configure your concurrency limits today!

Using AWS Step Functions State Machines to Handle Workflow-Driven AWS CodePipeline Actions

Post Syndicated from Marcilio Mendonca original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/devops/using-aws-step-functions-state-machines-to-handle-workflow-driven-aws-codepipeline-actions/

AWS CodePipeline is a continuous integration and continuous delivery service for fast and reliable application and infrastructure updates. It offers powerful integration with other AWS services, such as AWS CodeBuildAWS CodeDeployAWS CodeCommit, AWS CloudFormation and with third-party tools such as Jenkins and GitHub. These services make it possible for AWS customers to successfully automate various tasks, including infrastructure provisioning, blue/green deployments, serverless deployments, AMI baking, database provisioning, and release management.

Developers have been able to use CodePipeline to build sophisticated automation pipelines that often require a single CodePipeline action to perform multiple tasks, fork into different execution paths, and deal with asynchronous behavior. For example, to deploy a Lambda function, a CodePipeline action might first inspect the changes pushed to the code repository. If only the Lambda code has changed, the action can simply update the Lambda code package, create a new version, and point the Lambda alias to the new version. If the changes also affect infrastructure resources managed by AWS CloudFormation, the pipeline action might have to create a stack or update an existing one through the use of a change set. In addition, if an update is required, the pipeline action might enforce a safety policy to infrastructure resources that prevents the deletion and replacement of resources. You can do this by creating a change set and having the pipeline action inspect its changes before updating the stack. Change sets that do not conform to the policy are deleted.

This use case is a good illustration of workflow-driven pipeline actions. These are actions that run multiple tasks, deal with async behavior and loops, need to maintain and propagate state, and fork into different execution paths. Implementing workflow-driven actions directly in CodePipeline can lead to complex pipelines that are hard for developers to understand and maintain. Ideally, a pipeline action should perform a single task and delegate the complexity of dealing with workflow-driven behavior associated with that task to a state machine engine. This would make it possible for developers to build simpler, more intuitive pipelines and allow them to use state machine execution logs to visualize and troubleshoot their pipeline actions.

In this blog post, we discuss how AWS Step Functions state machines can be used to handle workflow-driven actions. We show how a CodePipeline action can trigger a Step Functions state machine and how the pipeline and the state machine are kept decoupled through a Lambda function. The advantages of using state machines include:

  • Simplified logic (complex tasks are broken into multiple smaller tasks).
  • Ease of handling asynchronous behavior (through state machine wait states).
  • Built-in support for choices and processing different execution paths (through state machine choices).
  • Built-in visualization and logging of the state machine execution.

The source code for the sample pipeline, pipeline actions, and state machine used in this post is available at https://github.com/awslabs/aws-codepipeline-stepfunctions.

Overview

This figure shows the components in the CodePipeline-Step Functions integration that will be described in this post. The pipeline contains two stages: a Source stage represented by a CodeCommit Git repository and a Prod stage with a single Deploy action that represents the workflow-driven action.

This action invokes a Lambda function (1) called the State Machine Trigger Lambda, which, in turn, triggers a Step Function state machine to process the request (2). The Lambda function sends a continuation token back to the pipeline (3) to continue its execution later and terminates. Seconds later, the pipeline invokes the Lambda function again (4), passing the continuation token received. The Lambda function checks the execution state of the state machine (5,6) and communicates the status to the pipeline. The process is repeated until the state machine execution is complete. Then the Lambda function notifies the pipeline that the corresponding pipeline action is complete (7). If the state machine has failed, the Lambda function will then fail the pipeline action and stop its execution (7). While running, the state machine triggers various Lambda functions to perform different tasks. The state machine and the pipeline are fully decoupled. Their interaction is handled by the Lambda function.

The Deploy State Machine

The sample state machine used in this post is a simplified version of the use case, with emphasis on infrastructure deployment. The state machine will follow distinct execution paths and thus have different outcomes, depending on:

  • The current state of the AWS CloudFormation stack.
  • The nature of the code changes made to the AWS CloudFormation template and pushed into the pipeline.

If the stack does not exist, it will be created. If the stack exists, a change set will be created and its resources inspected by the state machine. The inspection consists of parsing the change set results and detecting whether any resources will be deleted or replaced. If no resources are being deleted or replaced, the change set is allowed to be executed and the state machine completes successfully. Otherwise, the change set is deleted and the state machine completes execution with a failure as the terminal state.

Let’s dive into each of these execution paths.

Path 1: Create a Stack and Succeed Deployment

The Deploy state machine is shown here. It is triggered by the Lambda function using the following input parameters stored in an S3 bucket.

Create New Stack Execution Path

{
    "environmentName": "prod",
    "stackName": "sample-lambda-app",
    "templatePath": "infra/Lambda-template.yaml",
    "revisionS3Bucket": "codepipeline-us-east-1-418586629775",
    "revisionS3Key": "StepFunctionsDrivenD/CodeCommit/sjcmExZ"
}

Note that some values used here are for the use case example only. Account-specific parameters like revisionS3Bucket and revisionS3Key will be different when you deploy this use case in your account.

These input parameters are used by various states in the state machine and passed to the corresponding Lambda functions to perform different tasks. For example, stackName is used to create a stack, check the status of stack creation, and create a change set. The environmentName represents the environment (for example, dev, test, prod) to which the code is being deployed. It is used to prefix the name of stacks and change sets.

With the exception of built-in states such as wait and choice, each state in the state machine invokes a specific Lambda function.  The results received from the Lambda invocations are appended to the state machine’s original input. When the state machine finishes its execution, several parameters will have been added to its original input.

The first stage in the state machine is “Check Stack Existence”. It checks whether a stack with the input name specified in the stackName input parameter already exists. The output of the state adds a Boolean value called doesStackExist to the original state machine input as follows:

{
  "doesStackExist": true,
  "environmentName": "prod",
  "stackName": "sample-lambda-app",
  "templatePath": "infra/lambda-template.yaml",
  "revisionS3Bucket": "codepipeline-us-east-1-418586629775",
  "revisionS3Key": "StepFunctionsDrivenD/CodeCommit/sjcmExZ",
}

The following stage, “Does Stack Exist?”, is represented by Step Functions built-in choice state. It checks the value of doesStackExist to determine whether a new stack needs to be created (doesStackExist=true) or a change set needs to be created and inspected (doesStackExist=false).

If the stack does not exist, the states illustrated in green in the preceding figure are executed. This execution path creates the stack, waits until the stack is created, checks the status of the stack’s creation, and marks the deployment successful after the stack has been created. Except for “Stack Created?” and “Wait Stack Creation,” each of these stages invokes a Lambda function. “Stack Created?” and “Wait Stack Creation” are implemented by using the built-in choice state (to decide which path to follow) and the wait state (to wait a few seconds before proceeding), respectively. Each stage adds the results of their Lambda function executions to the initial input of the state machine, allowing future stages to process them.

Path 2: Safely Update a Stack and Mark Deployment as Successful

Safely Update a Stack and Mark Deployment as Successful Execution Path

If the stack indicated by the stackName parameter already exists, a different path is executed. (See the green states in the figure.) This path will create a change set and use wait and choice states to wait until the change set is created. Afterwards, a stage in the execution path will inspect  the resources affected before the change set is executed.

The inspection procedure represented by the “Inspect Change Set Changes” stage consists of parsing the resources affected by the change set and checking whether any of the existing resources are being deleted or replaced. The following is an excerpt of the algorithm, where changeSetChanges.Changes is the object representing the change set changes:

...
var RESOURCES_BEING_DELETED_OR_REPLACED = "RESOURCES-BEING-DELETED-OR-REPLACED";
var CAN_SAFELY_UPDATE_EXISTING_STACK = "CAN-SAFELY-UPDATE-EXISTING-STACK";
for (var i = 0; i < changeSetChanges.Changes.length; i++) {
    var change = changeSetChanges.Changes[i];
    if (change.Type == "Resource") {
        if (change.ResourceChange.Action == "Delete") {
            return RESOURCES_BEING_DELETED_OR_REPLACED;
        }
        if (change.ResourceChange.Action == "Modify") {
            if (change.ResourceChange.Replacement == "True") {
                return RESOURCES_BEING_DELETED_OR_REPLACED;
            }
        }
    }
}
return CAN_SAFELY_UPDATE_EXISTING_STACK;

The algorithm returns different values to indicate whether the change set can be safely executed (CAN_SAFELY_UPDATE_EXISTING_STACK or RESOURCES_BEING_DELETED_OR_REPLACED). This value is used later by the state machine to decide whether to execute the change set and update the stack or interrupt the deployment.

The output of the “Inspect Change Set” stage is shown here.

{
  "environmentName": "prod",
  "stackName": "sample-lambda-app",
  "templatePath": "infra/lambda-template.yaml",
  "revisionS3Bucket": "codepipeline-us-east-1-418586629775",
  "revisionS3Key": "StepFunctionsDrivenD/CodeCommit/sjcmExZ",
  "doesStackExist": true,
  "changeSetName": "prod-sample-lambda-app-change-set-545",
  "changeSetCreationStatus": "complete",
  "changeSetAction": "CAN-SAFELY-UPDATE-EXISTING-STACK"
}

At this point, these parameters have been added to the state machine’s original input:

  • changeSetName, which is added by the “Create Change Set” state.
  • changeSetCreationStatus, which is added by the “Get Change Set Creation Status” state.
  • changeSetAction, which is added by the “Inspect Change Set Changes” state.

The “Safe to Update Infra?” step is a choice state (its JSON spec follows) that simply checks the value of the changeSetAction parameter. If the value is equal to “CAN-SAFELY-UPDATE-EXISTING-STACK“, meaning that no resources will be deleted or replaced, the step will execute the change set by proceeding to the “Execute Change Set” state. The deployment is successful (the state machine completes its execution successfully).

"Safe to Update Infra?": {
      "Type": "Choice",
      "Choices": [
        {
          "Variable": "$.taskParams.changeSetAction",
          "StringEquals": "CAN-SAFELY-UPDATE-EXISTING-STACK",
          "Next": "Execute Change Set"
        }
      ],
      "Default": "Deployment Failed"
 }

Path 3: Reject Stack Update and Fail Deployment

Reject Stack Update and Fail Deployment Execution Path

If the changeSetAction parameter is different from “CAN-SAFELY-UPDATE-EXISTING-STACK“, the state machine will interrupt the deployment by deleting the change set and proceeding to the “Deployment Fail” step, which is a built-in Fail state. (Its JSON spec follows.) This state causes the state machine to stop in a failed state and serves to indicate to the Lambda function that the pipeline deployment should be interrupted in a fail state as well.

 "Deployment Failed": {
      "Type": "Fail",
      "Cause": "Deployment Failed",
      "Error": "Deployment Failed"
    }

In all three scenarios, there’s a state machine’s visual representation available in the AWS Step Functions console that makes it very easy for developers to identify what tasks have been executed or why a deployment has failed. Developers can also inspect the inputs and outputs of each state and look at the state machine Lambda function’s logs for details. Meanwhile, the corresponding CodePipeline action remains very simple and intuitive for developers who only need to know whether the deployment was successful or failed.

The State Machine Trigger Lambda Function

The Trigger Lambda function is invoked directly by the Deploy action in CodePipeline. The CodePipeline action must pass a JSON structure to the trigger function through the UserParameters attribute, as follows:

{
  "s3Bucket": "codepipeline-StepFunctions-sample",
  "stateMachineFile": "state_machine_input.json"
}

The s3Bucket parameter specifies the S3 bucket location for the state machine input parameters file. The stateMachineFile parameter specifies the file holding the input parameters. By being able to specify different input parameters to the state machine, we make the Trigger Lambda function and the state machine reusable across environments. For example, the same state machine could be called from a test and prod pipeline action by specifying a different S3 bucket or state machine input file for each environment.

The Trigger Lambda function performs two main tasks: triggering the state machine and checking the execution state of the state machine. Its core logic is shown here:

exports.index = function (event, context, callback) {
    try {
        console.log("Event: " + JSON.stringify(event));
        console.log("Context: " + JSON.stringify(context));
        console.log("Environment Variables: " + JSON.stringify(process.env));
        if (Util.isContinuingPipelineTask(event)) {
            monitorStateMachineExecution(event, context, callback);
        }
        else {
            triggerStateMachine(event, context, callback);
        }
    }
    catch (err) {
        failure(Util.jobId(event), callback, context.invokeid, err.message);
    }
}

Util.isContinuingPipelineTask(event) is a utility function that checks if the Trigger Lambda function is being called for the first time (that is, no continuation token is passed by CodePipeline) or as a continuation of a previous call. In its first execution, the Lambda function will trigger the state machine and send a continuation token to CodePipeline that contains the state machine execution ARN. The state machine ARN is exposed to the Lambda function through a Lambda environment variable called stateMachineArn. Here is the code that triggers the state machine:

function triggerStateMachine(event, context, callback) {
    var stateMachineArn = process.env.stateMachineArn;
    var s3Bucket = Util.actionUserParameter(event, "s3Bucket");
    var stateMachineFile = Util.actionUserParameter(event, "stateMachineFile");
    getStateMachineInputData(s3Bucket, stateMachineFile)
        .then(function (data) {
            var initialParameters = data.Body.toString();
            var stateMachineInputJSON = createStateMachineInitialInput(initialParameters, event);
            console.log("State machine input JSON: " + JSON.stringify(stateMachineInputJSON));
            return stateMachineInputJSON;
        })
        .then(function (stateMachineInputJSON) {
            return triggerStateMachineExecution(stateMachineArn, stateMachineInputJSON);
        })
        .then(function (triggerStateMachineOutput) {
            var continuationToken = { "stateMachineExecutionArn": triggerStateMachineOutput.executionArn };
            var message = "State machine has been triggered: " + JSON.stringify(triggerStateMachineOutput) + ", continuationToken: " + JSON.stringify(continuationToken);
            return continueExecution(Util.jobId(event), continuationToken, callback, message);
        })
        .catch(function (err) {
            console.log("Error triggering state machine: " + stateMachineArn + ", Error: " + err.message);
            failure(Util.jobId(event), callback, context.invokeid, err.message);
        })
}

The Trigger Lambda function fetches the state machine input parameters from an S3 file, triggers the execution of the state machine using the input parameters and the stateMachineArn environment variable, and signals to CodePipeline that the execution should continue later by passing a continuation token that contains the state machine execution ARN. In case any of these operations fail and an exception is thrown, the Trigger Lambda function will fail the pipeline immediately by signaling a pipeline failure through the putJobFailureResult CodePipeline API.

If the Lambda function is continuing a previous execution, it will extract the state machine execution ARN from the continuation token and check the status of the state machine, as shown here.

function monitorStateMachineExecution(event, context, callback) {
    var stateMachineArn = process.env.stateMachineArn;
    var continuationToken = JSON.parse(Util.continuationToken(event));
    var stateMachineExecutionArn = continuationToken.stateMachineExecutionArn;
    getStateMachineExecutionStatus(stateMachineExecutionArn)
        .then(function (response) {
            if (response.status === "RUNNING") {
                var message = "Execution: " + stateMachineExecutionArn + " of state machine: " + stateMachineArn + " is still " + response.status;
                return continueExecution(Util.jobId(event), continuationToken, callback, message);
            }
            if (response.status === "SUCCEEDED") {
                var message = "Execution: " + stateMachineExecutionArn + " of state machine: " + stateMachineArn + " has: " + response.status;
                return success(Util.jobId(event), callback, message);
            }
            // FAILED, TIMED_OUT, ABORTED
            var message = "Execution: " + stateMachineExecutionArn + " of state machine: " + stateMachineArn + " has: " + response.status;
            return failure(Util.jobId(event), callback, context.invokeid, message);
        })
        .catch(function (err) {
            var message = "Error monitoring execution: " + stateMachineExecutionArn + " of state machine: " + stateMachineArn + ", Error: " + err.message;
            failure(Util.jobId(event), callback, context.invokeid, message);
        });
}

If the state machine is in the RUNNING state, the Lambda function will send the continuation token back to the CodePipeline action. This will cause CodePipeline to call the Lambda function again a few seconds later. If the state machine has SUCCEEDED, then the Lambda function will notify the CodePipeline action that the action has succeeded. In any other case (FAILURE, TIMED-OUT, or ABORT), the Lambda function will fail the pipeline action.

This behavior is especially useful for developers who are building and debugging a new state machine because a bug in the state machine can potentially leave the pipeline action hanging for long periods of time until it times out. The Trigger Lambda function prevents this.

Also, by having the Trigger Lambda function as a means to decouple the pipeline and state machine, we make the state machine more reusable. It can be triggered from anywhere, not just from a CodePipeline action.

The Pipeline in CodePipeline

Our sample pipeline contains two simple stages: the Source stage represented by a CodeCommit Git repository and the Prod stage, which contains the Deploy action that invokes the Trigger Lambda function. When the state machine decides that the change set created must be rejected (because it replaces or deletes some the existing production resources), it fails the pipeline without performing any updates to the existing infrastructure. (See the failed Deploy action in red.) Otherwise, the pipeline action succeeds, indicating that the existing provisioned infrastructure was either created (first run) or updated without impacting any resources. (See the green Deploy stage in the pipeline on the left.)

The Pipeline in CodePipeline

The JSON spec for the pipeline’s Prod stage is shown here. We use the UserParameters attribute to pass the S3 bucket and state machine input file to the Lambda function. These parameters are action-specific, which means that we can reuse the state machine in another pipeline action.

{
  "name": "Prod",
  "actions": [
      {
          "inputArtifacts": [
              {
                  "name": "CodeCommitOutput"
              }
          ],
          "name": "Deploy",
          "actionTypeId": {
              "category": "Invoke",
              "owner": "AWS",
              "version": "1",
              "provider": "Lambda"
          },
          "outputArtifacts": [],
          "configuration": {
              "FunctionName": "StateMachineTriggerLambda",
              "UserParameters": "{\"s3Bucket\": \"codepipeline-StepFunctions-sample\", \"stateMachineFile\": \"state_machine_input.json\"}"
          },
          "runOrder": 1
      }
  ]
}

Conclusion

In this blog post, we discussed how state machines in AWS Step Functions can be used to handle workflow-driven actions. We showed how a Lambda function can be used to fully decouple the pipeline and the state machine and manage their interaction. The use of a state machine greatly simplified the associated CodePipeline action, allowing us to build a much simpler and cleaner pipeline while drilling down into the state machine’s execution for troubleshooting or debugging.

Here are two exercises you can complete by using the source code.

Exercise #1: Do not fail the state machine and pipeline action after inspecting a change set that deletes or replaces resources. Instead, create a stack with a different name (think of blue/green deployments). You can do this by creating a state machine transition between the “Safe to Update Infra?” and “Create Stack” stages and passing a new stack name as input to the “Create Stack” stage.

Exercise #2: Add wait logic to the state machine to wait until the change set completes its execution before allowing the state machine to proceed to the “Deployment Succeeded” stage. Use the stack creation case as an example. You’ll have to create a Lambda function (similar to the Lambda function that checks the creation status of a stack) to get the creation status of the change set.

Have fun and share your thoughts!

About the Author

Marcilio Mendonca is a Sr. Consultant in the Canadian Professional Services Team at Amazon Web Services. He has helped AWS customers design, build, and deploy best-in-class, cloud-native AWS applications using VMs, containers, and serverless architectures. Before he joined AWS, Marcilio was a Software Development Engineer at Amazon. Marcilio also holds a Ph.D. in Computer Science. In his spare time, he enjoys playing drums, riding his motorcycle in the Toronto GTA area, and spending quality time with his family.

Predict Billboard Top 10 Hits Using RStudio, H2O and Amazon Athena

Post Syndicated from Gopal Wunnava original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/big-data/predict-billboard-top-10-hits-using-rstudio-h2o-and-amazon-athena/

Success in the popular music industry is typically measured in terms of the number of Top 10 hits artists have to their credit. The music industry is a highly competitive multi-billion dollar business, and record labels incur various costs in exchange for a percentage of the profits from sales and concert tickets.

Predicting the success of an artist’s release in the popular music industry can be difficult. One release may be extremely popular, resulting in widespread play on TV, radio and social media, while another single may turn out quite unpopular, and therefore unprofitable. Record labels need to be selective in their decision making, and predictive analytics can help them with decision making around the type of songs and artists they need to promote.

In this walkthrough, you leverage H2O.ai, Amazon Athena, and RStudio to make predictions on whether a song might make it to the Top 10 Billboard charts. You explore the GLM, GBM, and deep learning modeling techniques using H2O’s rapid, distributed and easy-to-use open source parallel processing engine. RStudio is a popular IDE, licensed either commercially or under AGPLv3, for working with R. This is ideal if you don’t want to connect to a server via SSH and use code editors such as vi to do analytics. RStudio is available in a desktop version, or a server version that allows you to access R via a web browser. RStudio’s Notebooks feature is used to demonstrate the execution of code and output. In addition, this post showcases how you can leverage Athena for query and interactive analysis during the modeling phase. A working knowledge of statistics and machine learning would be helpful to interpret the analysis being performed in this post.

Walkthrough

Your goal is to predict whether a song will make it to the Top 10 Billboard charts. For this purpose, you will be using multiple modeling techniques―namely GLM, GBM and deep learning―and choose the model that is the best fit.

This solution involves the following steps:

  • Install and configure RStudio with Athena
  • Log in to RStudio
  • Install R packages
  • Connect to Athena
  • Create a dataset
  • Create models

Install and configure RStudio with Athena

Use the following AWS CloudFormation stack to install, configure, and connect RStudio on an Amazon EC2 instance with Athena.

Launching this stack creates all required resources and prerequisites:

  • Amazon EC2 instance with Amazon Linux (minimum size of t2.large is recommended)
  • Provisioning of the EC2 instance in an existing VPC and public subnet
  • Installation of Java 8
  • Assignment of an IAM role to the EC2 instance with the required permissions for accessing Athena and Amazon S3
  • Security group allowing access to the RStudio and SSH ports from the internet (I recommend restricting access to these ports)
  • S3 staging bucket required for Athena (referenced within RStudio as ATHENABUCKET)
  • RStudio username and password
  • Setup logs in Amazon CloudWatch Logs (if needed for additional troubleshooting)
  • Amazon EC2 Systems Manager agent, which makes it easy to manage and patch

All AWS resources are created in the US-East-1 Region. To avoid cross-region data transfer fees, launch the CloudFormation stack in the same region. To check the availability of Athena in other regions, see Region Table.

Log in to RStudio

The instance security group has been automatically configured to allow incoming connections on the RStudio port 8787 from any source internet address. You can edit the security group to restrict source IP access. If you have trouble connecting, ensure that port 8787 isn’t blocked by subnet network ACLS or by your outgoing proxy/firewall.

  1. In the CloudFormation stack, choose Outputs, Value, and then open the RStudio URL. You might need to wait for a few minutes until the instance has been launched.
  2. Log in to RStudio with the and password you provided during setup.

Install R packages

Next, install the required R packages from the RStudio console. You can download the R notebook file containing just the code.

#install pacman – a handy package manager for managing installs
if("pacman" %in% rownames(installed.packages()) == FALSE)
{install.packages("pacman")}  
library(pacman)
p_load(h2o,rJava,RJDBC,awsjavasdk)
h2o.init(nthreads = -1)
##  Connection successful!
## 
## R is connected to the H2O cluster: 
##     H2O cluster uptime:         2 hours 42 minutes 
##     H2O cluster version:        3.10.4.6 
##     H2O cluster version age:    4 months and 4 days !!! 
##     H2O cluster name:           H2O_started_from_R_rstudio_hjx881 
##     H2O cluster total nodes:    1 
##     H2O cluster total memory:   3.30 GB 
##     H2O cluster total cores:    4 
##     H2O cluster allowed cores:  4 
##     H2O cluster healthy:        TRUE 
##     H2O Connection ip:          localhost 
##     H2O Connection port:        54321 
##     H2O Connection proxy:       NA 
##     H2O Internal Security:      FALSE 
##     R Version:                  R version 3.3.3 (2017-03-06)
## Warning in h2o.clusterInfo(): 
## Your H2O cluster version is too old (4 months and 4 days)!
## Please download and install the latest version from http://h2o.ai/download/
#install aws sdk if not present (pre-requisite for using Athena with an IAM role)
if (!aws_sdk_present()) {
  install_aws_sdk()
}

load_sdk()
## NULL

Connect to Athena

Next, establish a connection to Athena from RStudio, using an IAM role associated with your EC2 instance. Use ATHENABUCKET to specify the S3 staging directory.

URL <- 'https://s3.amazonaws.com/athena-downloads/drivers/AthenaJDBC41-1.0.1.jar'
fil <- basename(URL)
#download the file into current working directory
if (!file.exists(fil)) download.file(URL, fil)
#verify that the file has been downloaded successfully
list.files()
## [1] "AthenaJDBC41-1.0.1.jar"
drv <- JDBC(driverClass="com.amazonaws.athena.jdbc.AthenaDriver", fil, identifier.quote="'")

con <- jdbcConnection <- dbConnect(drv, 'jdbc:awsathena://athena.us-east-1.amazonaws.com:443/',
                                   s3_staging_dir=Sys.getenv("ATHENABUCKET"),
                                   aws_credentials_provider_class="com.amazonaws.auth.DefaultAWSCredentialsProviderChain")

Verify the connection. The results returned depend on your specific Athena setup.

con
## <JDBCConnection>
dbListTables(con)
##  [1] "gdelt"               "wikistats"           "elb_logs_raw_native"
##  [4] "twitter"             "twitter2"            "usermovieratings"   
##  [7] "eventcodes"          "events"              "billboard"          
## [10] "billboardtop10"      "elb_logs"            "gdelthist"          
## [13] "gdeltmaster"         "twitter"             "twitter3"

Create a dataset

For this analysis, you use a sample dataset combining information from Billboard and Wikipedia with Echo Nest data in the Million Songs Dataset. Upload this dataset into your own S3 bucket. The table below provides a description of the fields used in this dataset.

Field Description
year Year that song was released
songtitle Title of the song
artistname Name of the song artist
songid Unique identifier for the song
artistid Unique identifier for the song artist
timesignature Variable estimating the time signature of the song
timesignature_confidence Confidence in the estimate for the timesignature
loudness Continuous variable indicating the average amplitude of the audio in decibels
tempo Variable indicating the estimated beats per minute of the song
tempo_confidence Confidence in the estimate for tempo
key Variable with twelve levels indicating the estimated key of the song (C, C#, B)
key_confidence Confidence in the estimate for key
energy Variable that represents the overall acoustic energy of the song, using a mix of features such as loudness
pitch Continuous variable that indicates the pitch of the song
timbre_0_min thru timbre_11_min Variables that indicate the minimum values over all segments for each of the twelve values in the timbre vector
timbre_0_max thru timbre_11_max Variables that indicate the maximum values over all segments for each of the twelve values in the timbre vector
top10 Indicator for whether or not the song made it to the Top 10 of the Billboard charts (1 if it was in the top 10, and 0 if not)

Create an Athena table based on the dataset

In the Athena console, select the default database, sampled, or create a new database.

Run the following create table statement.

create external table if not exists billboard
(
year int,
songtitle string,
artistname string,
songID string,
artistID string,
timesignature int,
timesignature_confidence double,
loudness double,
tempo double,
tempo_confidence double,
key int,
key_confidence double,
energy double,
pitch double,
timbre_0_min double,
timbre_0_max double,
timbre_1_min double,
timbre_1_max double,
timbre_2_min double,
timbre_2_max double,
timbre_3_min double,
timbre_3_max double,
timbre_4_min double,
timbre_4_max double,
timbre_5_min double,
timbre_5_max double,
timbre_6_min double,
timbre_6_max double,
timbre_7_min double,
timbre_7_max double,
timbre_8_min double,
timbre_8_max double,
timbre_9_min double,
timbre_9_max double,
timbre_10_min double,
timbre_10_max double,
timbre_11_min double,
timbre_11_max double,
Top10 int
)
ROW FORMAT DELIMITED
FIELDS TERMINATED BY ','
STORED AS TEXTFILE
LOCATION 's3://aws-bigdata-blog/artifacts/predict-billboard/data'
;

Inspect the table definition for the ‘billboard’ table that you have created. If you chose a database other than sampledb, replace that value with your choice.

dbGetQuery(con, "show create table sampledb.billboard")
##                                      createtab_stmt
## 1       CREATE EXTERNAL TABLE `sampledb.billboard`(
## 2                                       `year` int,
## 3                               `songtitle` string,
## 4                              `artistname` string,
## 5                                  `songid` string,
## 6                                `artistid` string,
## 7                              `timesignature` int,
## 8                `timesignature_confidence` double,
## 9                                `loudness` double,
## 10                                  `tempo` double,
## 11                       `tempo_confidence` double,
## 12                                       `key` int,
## 13                         `key_confidence` double,
## 14                                 `energy` double,
## 15                                  `pitch` double,
## 16                           `timbre_0_min` double,
## 17                           `timbre_0_max` double,
## 18                           `timbre_1_min` double,
## 19                           `timbre_1_max` double,
## 20                           `timbre_2_min` double,
## 21                           `timbre_2_max` double,
## 22                           `timbre_3_min` double,
## 23                           `timbre_3_max` double,
## 24                           `timbre_4_min` double,
## 25                           `timbre_4_max` double,
## 26                           `timbre_5_min` double,
## 27                           `timbre_5_max` double,
## 28                           `timbre_6_min` double,
## 29                           `timbre_6_max` double,
## 30                           `timbre_7_min` double,
## 31                           `timbre_7_max` double,
## 32                           `timbre_8_min` double,
## 33                           `timbre_8_max` double,
## 34                           `timbre_9_min` double,
## 35                           `timbre_9_max` double,
## 36                          `timbre_10_min` double,
## 37                          `timbre_10_max` double,
## 38                          `timbre_11_min` double,
## 39                          `timbre_11_max` double,
## 40                                     `top10` int)
## 41                             ROW FORMAT DELIMITED 
## 42                         FIELDS TERMINATED BY ',' 
## 43                            STORED AS INPUTFORMAT 
## 44       'org.apache.hadoop.mapred.TextInputFormat' 
## 45                                     OUTPUTFORMAT 
## 46  'org.apache.hadoop.hive.ql.io.HiveIgnoreKeyTextOutputFormat'
## 47                                        LOCATION
## 48    's3://aws-bigdata-blog/artifacts/predict-billboard/data'
## 49                                  TBLPROPERTIES (
## 50            'transient_lastDdlTime'='1505484133')

Run a sample query

Next, run a sample query to obtain a list of all songs from Janet Jackson that made it to the Billboard Top 10 charts.

dbGetQuery(con, " SELECT songtitle,artistname,top10   FROM sampledb.billboard WHERE lower(artistname) =     'janet jackson' AND top10 = 1")
##                       songtitle    artistname top10
## 1                       Runaway Janet Jackson     1
## 2               Because Of Love Janet Jackson     1
## 3                         Again Janet Jackson     1
## 4                            If Janet Jackson     1
## 5  Love Will Never Do (Without You) Janet Jackson 1
## 6                     Black Cat Janet Jackson     1
## 7               Come Back To Me Janet Jackson     1
## 8                       Alright Janet Jackson     1
## 9                      Escapade Janet Jackson     1
## 10                Rhythm Nation Janet Jackson     1

Determine how many songs in this dataset are specifically from the year 2010.

dbGetQuery(con, " SELECT count(*)   FROM sampledb.billboard WHERE year = 2010")
##   _col0
## 1   373

The sample dataset provides certain song properties of interest that can be analyzed to gauge the impact to the song’s overall popularity. Look at one such property, timesignature, and determine the value that is the most frequent among songs in the database. Timesignature is a measure of the number of beats and the type of note involved.

Running the query directly may result in an error, as shown in the commented lines below. This error is a result of trying to retrieve a large result set over a JDBC connection, which can cause out-of-memory issues at the client level. To address this, reduce the fetch size and run again.

#t<-dbGetQuery(con, " SELECT timesignature FROM sampledb.billboard")
#Note:  Running the preceding query results in the following error: 
#Error in .jcall(rp, "I", "fetch", stride, block): java.sql.SQLException: The requested #fetchSize is more than the allowed value in Athena. Please reduce the fetchSize and try #again. Refer to the Athena documentation for valid fetchSize values.
# Use the dbSendQuery function, reduce the fetch size, and run again
r <- dbSendQuery(con, " SELECT timesignature     FROM sampledb.billboard")
dftimesignature<- fetch(r, n=-1, block=100)
dbClearResult(r)
## [1] TRUE
table(dftimesignature)
## dftimesignature
##    0    1    3    4    5    7 
##   10  143  503 6787  112   19
nrow(dftimesignature)
## [1] 7574

From the results, observe that 6787 songs have a timesignature of 4.

Next, determine the song with the highest tempo.

dbGetQuery(con, " SELECT songtitle,artistname,tempo   FROM sampledb.billboard WHERE tempo = (SELECT max(tempo) FROM sampledb.billboard) ")
##                   songtitle      artistname   tempo
## 1 Wanna Be Startin' Somethin' Michael Jackson 244.307

Create the training dataset

Your model needs to be trained such that it can learn and make accurate predictions. Split the data into training and test datasets, and create the training dataset first.  This dataset contains all observations from the year 2009 and earlier. You may face the same JDBC connection issue pointed out earlier, so this query uses a fetch size.

#BillboardTrain <- dbGetQuery(con, "SELECT * FROM sampledb.billboard WHERE year <= 2009")
#Running the preceding query results in the following error:-
#Error in .verify.JDBC.result(r, "Unable to retrieve JDBC result set for ", : Unable to retrieve #JDBC result set for SELECT * FROM sampledb.billboard WHERE year <= 2009 (Internal error)
#Follow the same approach as before to address this issue.

r <- dbSendQuery(con, "SELECT * FROM sampledb.billboard WHERE year <= 2009")
BillboardTrain <- fetch(r, n=-1, block=100)
dbClearResult(r)
## [1] TRUE
BillboardTrain[1:2,c(1:3,6:10)]
##   year           songtitle artistname timesignature
## 1 2009 The Awkward Goodbye    Athlete             3
## 2 2009        Rubik's Cube    Athlete             3
##   timesignature_confidence loudness   tempo tempo_confidence
## 1                    0.732   -6.320  89.614   0.652
## 2                    0.906   -9.541 117.742   0.542
nrow(BillboardTrain)
## [1] 7201

Create the test dataset

BillboardTest <- dbGetQuery(con, "SELECT * FROM sampledb.billboard where year = 2010")
BillboardTest[1:2,c(1:3,11:15)]
##   year              songtitle        artistname key
## 1 2010 This Is the House That Doubt Built A Day to Remember  11
## 2 2010        Sticks & Bricks A Day to Remember  10
##   key_confidence    energy pitch timbre_0_min
## 1          0.453 0.9666556 0.024        0.002
## 2          0.469 0.9847095 0.025        0.000
nrow(BillboardTest)
## [1] 373

Convert the training and test datasets into H2O dataframes

train.h2o <- as.h2o(BillboardTrain)
## 
  |                                                                       
  |                                                                 |   0%
  |                                                                       
  |=================================================================| 100%
test.h2o <- as.h2o(BillboardTest)
## 
  |                                                                       
  |                                                                 |   0%
  |                                                                       
  |=================================================================| 100%

Inspect the column names in your H2O dataframes.

colnames(train.h2o)
##  [1] "year"                     "songtitle"               
##  [3] "artistname"               "songid"                  
##  [5] "artistid"                 "timesignature"           
##  [7] "timesignature_confidence" "loudness"                
##  [9] "tempo"                    "tempo_confidence"        
## [11] "key"                      "key_confidence"          
## [13] "energy"                   "pitch"                   
## [15] "timbre_0_min"             "timbre_0_max"            
## [17] "timbre_1_min"             "timbre_1_max"            
## [19] "timbre_2_min"             "timbre_2_max"            
## [21] "timbre_3_min"             "timbre_3_max"            
## [23] "timbre_4_min"             "timbre_4_max"            
## [25] "timbre_5_min"             "timbre_5_max"            
## [27] "timbre_6_min"             "timbre_6_max"            
## [29] "timbre_7_min"             "timbre_7_max"            
## [31] "timbre_8_min"             "timbre_8_max"            
## [33] "timbre_9_min"             "timbre_9_max"            
## [35] "timbre_10_min"            "timbre_10_max"           
## [37] "timbre_11_min"            "timbre_11_max"           
## [39] "top10"

Create models

You need to designate the independent and dependent variables prior to applying your modeling algorithms. Because you’re trying to predict the ‘top10’ field, this would be your dependent variable and everything else would be independent.

Create your first model using GLM. Because GLM works best with numeric data, you create your model by dropping non-numeric variables. You only use the variables in the dataset that describe the numerical attributes of the song in the logistic regression model. You won’t use these variables:  “year”, “songtitle”, “artistname”, “songid”, or “artistid”.

y.dep <- 39
x.indep <- c(6:38)
x.indep
##  [1]  6  7  8  9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
## [24] 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38

Create Model 1: All numeric variables

Create Model 1 with the training dataset, using GLM as the modeling algorithm and H2O’s built-in h2o.glm function.

modelh1 <- h2o.glm( y = y.dep, x = x.indep, training_frame = train.h2o, family = "binomial")
## 
  |                                                                       
  |                                                                 |   0%
  |                                                                       
  |=====                                                            |   8%
  |                                                                       
  |=================================================================| 100%

Measure the performance of Model 1, using H2O’s built-in performance function.

h2o.performance(model=modelh1,newdata=test.h2o)
## H2OBinomialMetrics: glm
## 
## MSE:  0.09924684
## RMSE:  0.3150347
## LogLoss:  0.3220267
## Mean Per-Class Error:  0.2380168
## AUC:  0.8431394
## Gini:  0.6862787
## R^2:  0.254663
## Null Deviance:  326.0801
## Residual Deviance:  240.2319
## AIC:  308.2319
## 
## Confusion Matrix (vertical: actual; across: predicted) for F1-optimal threshold:
##          0   1    Error     Rate
## 0      255  59 0.187898  =59/314
## 1       17  42 0.288136   =17/59
## Totals 272 101 0.203753  =76/373
## 
## Maximum Metrics: Maximum metrics at their respective thresholds
##                         metric threshold    value idx
## 1                       max f1  0.192772 0.525000 100
## 2                       max f2  0.124912 0.650510 155
## 3                 max f0point5  0.416258 0.612903  23
## 4                 max accuracy  0.416258 0.879357  23
## 5                max precision  0.813396 1.000000   0
## 6                   max recall  0.037579 1.000000 282
## 7              max specificity  0.813396 1.000000   0
## 8             max absolute_mcc  0.416258 0.455251  23
## 9   max min_per_class_accuracy  0.161402 0.738854 125
## 10 max mean_per_class_accuracy  0.124912 0.765006 155
## 
## Gains/Lift Table: Extract with `h2o.gainsLift(<model>, <data>)` or ` 
h2o.auc(h2o.performance(modelh1,test.h2o)) 
## [1] 0.8431394

The AUC metric provides insight into how well the classifier is able to separate the two classes. In this case, the value of 0.8431394 indicates that the classification is good. (A value of 0.5 indicates a worthless test, while a value of 1.0 indicates a perfect test.)

Next, inspect the coefficients of the variables in the dataset.

dfmodelh1 <- as.data.frame(h2o.varimp(modelh1))
dfmodelh1
##                       names coefficients sign
## 1              timbre_0_max  1.290938663  NEG
## 2                  loudness  1.262941934  POS
## 3                     pitch  0.616995941  NEG
## 4              timbre_1_min  0.422323735  POS
## 5              timbre_6_min  0.349016024  NEG
## 6                    energy  0.348092062  NEG
## 7             timbre_11_min  0.307331997  NEG
## 8              timbre_3_max  0.302225619  NEG
## 9             timbre_11_max  0.243632060  POS
## 10             timbre_4_min  0.224233951  POS
## 11             timbre_4_max  0.204134342  POS
## 12             timbre_5_min  0.199149324  NEG
## 13             timbre_0_min  0.195147119  POS
## 14 timesignature_confidence  0.179973904  POS
## 15         tempo_confidence  0.144242598  POS
## 16            timbre_10_max  0.137644568  POS
## 17             timbre_7_min  0.126995955  NEG
## 18            timbre_10_min  0.123851179  POS
## 19             timbre_7_max  0.100031481  NEG
## 20             timbre_2_min  0.096127636  NEG
## 21           key_confidence  0.083115820  POS
## 22             timbre_6_max  0.073712419  POS
## 23            timesignature  0.067241917  POS
## 24             timbre_8_min  0.061301881  POS
## 25             timbre_8_max  0.060041698  POS
## 26                      key  0.056158445  POS
## 27             timbre_3_min  0.050825116  POS
## 28             timbre_9_max  0.033733561  POS
## 29             timbre_2_max  0.030939072  POS
## 30             timbre_9_min  0.020708113  POS
## 31             timbre_1_max  0.014228818  NEG
## 32                    tempo  0.008199861  POS
## 33             timbre_5_max  0.004837870  POS
## 34                                    NA <NA>

Typically, songs with heavier instrumentation tend to be louder (have higher values in the variable “loudness”) and more energetic (have higher values in the variable “energy”). This knowledge is helpful for interpreting the modeling results.

You can make the following observations from the results:

  • The coefficient estimates for the confidence values associated with the time signature, key, and tempo variables are positive. This suggests that higher confidence leads to a higher predicted probability of a Top 10 hit.
  • The coefficient estimate for loudness is positive, meaning that mainstream listeners prefer louder songs with heavier instrumentation.
  • The coefficient estimate for energy is negative, meaning that mainstream listeners prefer songs that are less energetic, which are those songs with light instrumentation.

These coefficients lead to contradictory conclusions for Model 1. This could be due to multicollinearity issues. Inspect the correlation between the variables “loudness” and “energy” in the training set.

cor(train.h2o$loudness,train.h2o$energy)
## [1] 0.7399067

This number indicates that these two variables are highly correlated, and Model 1 does indeed suffer from multicollinearity. Typically, you associate a value of -1.0 to -0.5 or 1.0 to 0.5 to indicate strong correlation, and a value of 0.1 to 0.1 to indicate weak correlation. To avoid this correlation issue, omit one of these two variables and re-create the models.

You build two variations of the original model:

  • Model 2, in which you keep “energy” and omit “loudness”
  • Model 3, in which you keep “loudness” and omit “energy”

You compare these two models and choose the model with a better fit for this use case.

Create Model 2: Keep energy and omit loudness

colnames(train.h2o)
##  [1] "year"                     "songtitle"               
##  [3] "artistname"               "songid"                  
##  [5] "artistid"                 "timesignature"           
##  [7] "timesignature_confidence" "loudness"                
##  [9] "tempo"                    "tempo_confidence"        
## [11] "key"                      "key_confidence"          
## [13] "energy"                   "pitch"                   
## [15] "timbre_0_min"             "timbre_0_max"            
## [17] "timbre_1_min"             "timbre_1_max"            
## [19] "timbre_2_min"             "timbre_2_max"            
## [21] "timbre_3_min"             "timbre_3_max"            
## [23] "timbre_4_min"             "timbre_4_max"            
## [25] "timbre_5_min"             "timbre_5_max"            
## [27] "timbre_6_min"             "timbre_6_max"            
## [29] "timbre_7_min"             "timbre_7_max"            
## [31] "timbre_8_min"             "timbre_8_max"            
## [33] "timbre_9_min"             "timbre_9_max"            
## [35] "timbre_10_min"            "timbre_10_max"           
## [37] "timbre_11_min"            "timbre_11_max"           
## [39] "top10"
y.dep <- 39
x.indep <- c(6:7,9:38)
x.indep
##  [1]  6  7  9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
## [24] 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38
modelh2 <- h2o.glm( y = y.dep, x = x.indep, training_frame = train.h2o, family = "binomial")
## 
  |                                                                       
  |                                                                 |   0%
  |                                                                       
  |=======                                                          |  10%
  |                                                                       
  |=================================================================| 100%

Measure the performance of Model 2.

h2o.performance(model=modelh2,newdata=test.h2o)
## H2OBinomialMetrics: glm
## 
## MSE:  0.09922606
## RMSE:  0.3150017
## LogLoss:  0.3228213
## Mean Per-Class Error:  0.2490554
## AUC:  0.8431933
## Gini:  0.6863867
## R^2:  0.2548191
## Null Deviance:  326.0801
## Residual Deviance:  240.8247
## AIC:  306.8247
## 
## Confusion Matrix (vertical: actual; across: predicted) for F1-optimal threshold:
##          0  1    Error     Rate
## 0      280 34 0.108280  =34/314
## 1       23 36 0.389831   =23/59
## Totals 303 70 0.152815  =57/373
## 
## Maximum Metrics: Maximum metrics at their respective thresholds
##                         metric threshold    value idx
## 1                       max f1  0.254391 0.558140  69
## 2                       max f2  0.113031 0.647208 157
## 3                 max f0point5  0.413999 0.596026  22
## 4                 max accuracy  0.446250 0.876676  18
## 5                max precision  0.811739 1.000000   0
## 6                   max recall  0.037682 1.000000 283
## 7              max specificity  0.811739 1.000000   0
## 8             max absolute_mcc  0.254391 0.469060  69
## 9   max min_per_class_accuracy  0.141051 0.716561 131
## 10 max mean_per_class_accuracy  0.113031 0.761821 157
## 
## Gains/Lift Table: Extract with `h2o.gainsLift(<model>, <data>)` or `h2o.gainsLift(<model>, valid=<T/F>, xval=<T/F>)`
dfmodelh2 <- as.data.frame(h2o.varimp(modelh2))
dfmodelh2
##                       names coefficients sign
## 1                     pitch  0.700331511  NEG
## 2              timbre_1_min  0.510270513  POS
## 3              timbre_0_max  0.402059546  NEG
## 4              timbre_6_min  0.333316236  NEG
## 5             timbre_11_min  0.331647383  NEG
## 6              timbre_3_max  0.252425901  NEG
## 7             timbre_11_max  0.227500308  POS
## 8              timbre_4_max  0.210663865  POS
## 9              timbre_0_min  0.208516163  POS
## 10             timbre_5_min  0.202748055  NEG
## 11             timbre_4_min  0.197246582  POS
## 12            timbre_10_max  0.172729619  POS
## 13         tempo_confidence  0.167523934  POS
## 14 timesignature_confidence  0.167398830  POS
## 15             timbre_7_min  0.142450727  NEG
## 16             timbre_8_max  0.093377516  POS
## 17            timbre_10_min  0.090333426  POS
## 18            timesignature  0.085851625  POS
## 19             timbre_7_max  0.083948442  NEG
## 20           key_confidence  0.079657073  POS
## 21             timbre_6_max  0.076426046  POS
## 22             timbre_2_min  0.071957831  NEG
## 23             timbre_9_max  0.071393189  POS
## 24             timbre_8_min  0.070225578  POS
## 25                      key  0.061394702  POS
## 26             timbre_3_min  0.048384697  POS
## 27             timbre_1_max  0.044721121  NEG
## 28                   energy  0.039698433  POS
## 29             timbre_5_max  0.039469064  POS
## 30             timbre_2_max  0.018461133  POS
## 31                    tempo  0.013279926  POS
## 32             timbre_9_min  0.005282143  NEG
## 33                                    NA <NA>

h2o.auc(h2o.performance(modelh2,test.h2o)) 
## [1] 0.8431933

You can make the following observations:

  • The AUC metric is 0.8431933.
  • Inspecting the coefficient of the variable energy, Model 2 suggests that songs with high energy levels tend to be more popular. This is as per expectation.
  • As H2O orders variables by significance, the variable energy is not significant in this model.

You can conclude that Model 2 is not ideal for this use , as energy is not significant.

CreateModel 3: Keep loudness but omit energy

colnames(train.h2o)
##  [1] "year"                     "songtitle"               
##  [3] "artistname"               "songid"                  
##  [5] "artistid"                 "timesignature"           
##  [7] "timesignature_confidence" "loudness"                
##  [9] "tempo"                    "tempo_confidence"        
## [11] "key"                      "key_confidence"          
## [13] "energy"                   "pitch"                   
## [15] "timbre_0_min"             "timbre_0_max"            
## [17] "timbre_1_min"             "timbre_1_max"            
## [19] "timbre_2_min"             "timbre_2_max"            
## [21] "timbre_3_min"             "timbre_3_max"            
## [23] "timbre_4_min"             "timbre_4_max"            
## [25] "timbre_5_min"             "timbre_5_max"            
## [27] "timbre_6_min"             "timbre_6_max"            
## [29] "timbre_7_min"             "timbre_7_max"            
## [31] "timbre_8_min"             "timbre_8_max"            
## [33] "timbre_9_min"             "timbre_9_max"            
## [35] "timbre_10_min"            "timbre_10_max"           
## [37] "timbre_11_min"            "timbre_11_max"           
## [39] "top10"
y.dep <- 39
x.indep <- c(6:12,14:38)
x.indep
##  [1]  6  7  8  9 10 11 12 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
## [24] 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38
modelh3 <- h2o.glm( y = y.dep, x = x.indep, training_frame = train.h2o, family = "binomial")
## 
  |                                                                       
  |                                                                 |   0%
  |                                                                       
  |========                                                         |  12%
  |                                                                       
  |=================================================================| 100%
perfh3<-h2o.performance(model=modelh3,newdata=test.h2o)
perfh3
## H2OBinomialMetrics: glm
## 
## MSE:  0.0978859
## RMSE:  0.3128672
## LogLoss:  0.3178367
## Mean Per-Class Error:  0.264925
## AUC:  0.8492389
## Gini:  0.6984778
## R^2:  0.2648836
## Null Deviance:  326.0801
## Residual Deviance:  237.1062
## AIC:  303.1062
## 
## Confusion Matrix (vertical: actual; across: predicted) for F1-optimal threshold:
##          0  1    Error     Rate
## 0      286 28 0.089172  =28/314
## 1       26 33 0.440678   =26/59
## Totals 312 61 0.144772  =54/373
## 
## Maximum Metrics: Maximum metrics at their respective thresholds
##                         metric threshold    value idx
## 1                       max f1  0.273799 0.550000  60
## 2                       max f2  0.125503 0.663265 155
## 3                 max f0point5  0.435479 0.628931  24
## 4                 max accuracy  0.435479 0.882038  24
## 5                max precision  0.821606 1.000000   0
## 6                   max recall  0.038328 1.000000 280
## 7              max specificity  0.821606 1.000000   0
## 8             max absolute_mcc  0.435479 0.471426  24
## 9   max min_per_class_accuracy  0.173693 0.745763 120
## 10 max mean_per_class_accuracy  0.125503 0.775073 155
## 
## Gains/Lift Table: Extract with `h2o.gainsLift(<model>, <data>)` or `h2o.gainsLift(<model>, valid=<T/F>, xval=<T/F>)`
dfmodelh3 <- as.data.frame(h2o.varimp(modelh3))
dfmodelh3
##                       names coefficients sign
## 1              timbre_0_max 1.216621e+00  NEG
## 2                  loudness 9.780973e-01  POS
## 3                     pitch 7.249788e-01  NEG
## 4              timbre_1_min 3.891197e-01  POS
## 5              timbre_6_min 3.689193e-01  NEG
## 6             timbre_11_min 3.086673e-01  NEG
## 7              timbre_3_max 3.025593e-01  NEG
## 8             timbre_11_max 2.459081e-01  POS
## 9              timbre_4_min 2.379749e-01  POS
## 10             timbre_4_max 2.157627e-01  POS
## 11             timbre_0_min 1.859531e-01  POS
## 12             timbre_5_min 1.846128e-01  NEG
## 13 timesignature_confidence 1.729658e-01  POS
## 14             timbre_7_min 1.431871e-01  NEG
## 15            timbre_10_max 1.366703e-01  POS
## 16            timbre_10_min 1.215954e-01  POS
## 17         tempo_confidence 1.183698e-01  POS
## 18             timbre_2_min 1.019149e-01  NEG
## 19           key_confidence 9.109701e-02  POS
## 20             timbre_7_max 8.987908e-02  NEG
## 21             timbre_6_max 6.935132e-02  POS
## 22             timbre_8_max 6.878241e-02  POS
## 23            timesignature 6.120105e-02  POS
## 24                      key 5.814805e-02  POS
## 25             timbre_8_min 5.759228e-02  POS
## 26             timbre_1_max 2.930285e-02  NEG
## 27             timbre_9_max 2.843755e-02  POS
## 28             timbre_3_min 2.380245e-02  POS
## 29             timbre_2_max 1.917035e-02  POS
## 30             timbre_5_max 1.715813e-02  POS
## 31                    tempo 1.364418e-02  NEG
## 32             timbre_9_min 8.463143e-05  NEG
## 33                                    NA <NA>
h2o.sensitivity(perfh3,0.5)
## Warning in h2o.find_row_by_threshold(object, t): Could not find exact
## threshold: 0.5 for this set of metrics; using closest threshold found:
## 0.501855569251422. Run `h2o.predict` and apply your desired threshold on a
## probability column.
## [[1]]
## [1] 0.2033898
h2o.auc(perfh3)
## [1] 0.8492389

You can make the following observations:

  • The AUC metric is 0.8492389.
  • From the confusion matrix, the model correctly predicts that 33 songs will be top 10 hits (true positives). However, it has 26 false positives (songs that the model predicted would be Top 10 hits, but ended up not being Top 10 hits).
  • Loudness has a positive coefficient estimate, meaning that this model predicts that songs with heavier instrumentation tend to be more popular. This is the same conclusion from Model 2.
  • Loudness is significant in this model.

Overall, Model 3 predicts a higher number of top 10 hits with an accuracy rate that is acceptable. To choose the best fit for production runs, record labels should consider the following factors:

  • Desired model accuracy at a given threshold
  • Number of correct predictions for top10 hits
  • Tolerable number of false positives or false negatives

Next, make predictions using Model 3 on the test dataset.

predict.regh <- h2o.predict(modelh3, test.h2o)
## 
  |                                                                       
  |                                                                 |   0%
  |                                                                       
  |=================================================================| 100%
print(predict.regh)
##   predict        p0          p1
## 1       0 0.9654739 0.034526052
## 2       0 0.9654748 0.034525236
## 3       0 0.9635547 0.036445318
## 4       0 0.9343579 0.065642149
## 5       0 0.9978334 0.002166601
## 6       0 0.9779949 0.022005078
## 
## [373 rows x 3 columns]
predict.regh$predict
##   predict
## 1       0
## 2       0
## 3       0
## 4       0
## 5       0
## 6       0
## 
## [373 rows x 1 column]
dpr<-as.data.frame(predict.regh)
#Rename the predicted column 
colnames(dpr)[colnames(dpr) == 'predict'] <- 'predict_top10'
table(dpr$predict_top10)
## 
##   0   1 
## 312  61

The first set of output results specifies the probabilities associated with each predicted observation.  For example, observation 1 is 96.54739% likely to not be a Top 10 hit, and 3.4526052% likely to be a Top 10 hit (predict=1 indicates Top 10 hit and predict=0 indicates not a Top 10 hit).  The second set of results list the actual predictions made.  From the third set of results, this model predicts that 61 songs will be top 10 hits.

Compute the baseline accuracy, by assuming that the baseline predicts the most frequent outcome, which is that most songs are not Top 10 hits.

table(BillboardTest$top10)
## 
##   0   1 
## 314  59

Now observe that the baseline model would get 314 observations correct, and 59 wrong, for an accuracy of 314/(314+59) = 0.8418231.

It seems that Model 3, with an accuracy of 0.8552, provides you with a small improvement over the baseline model. But is this model useful for record labels?

View the two models from an investment perspective:

  • A production company is interested in investing in songs that are more likely to make it to the Top 10. The company’s objective is to minimize the risk of financial losses attributed to investing in songs that end up unpopular.
  • How many songs does Model 3 correctly predict as a Top 10 hit in 2010? Looking at the confusion matrix, you see that it predicts 33 top 10 hits correctly at an optimal threshold, which is more than half the number
  • It will be more useful to the record label if you can provide the production company with a list of songs that are highly likely to end up in the Top 10.
  • The baseline model is not useful, as it simply does not label any song as a hit.

Considering the three models built so far, you can conclude that Model 3 proves to be the best investment choice for the record label.

GBM model

H2O provides you with the ability to explore other learning models, such as GBM and deep learning. Explore building a model using the GBM technique, using the built-in h2o.gbm function.

Before you do this, you need to convert the target variable to a factor for multinomial classification techniques.

train.h2o$top10=as.factor(train.h2o$top10)
gbm.modelh <- h2o.gbm(y=y.dep, x=x.indep, training_frame = train.h2o, ntrees = 500, max_depth = 4, learn_rate = 0.01, seed = 1122,distribution="multinomial")
## 
  |                                                                       
  |                                                                 |   0%
  |                                                                       
  |===                                                              |   5%
  |                                                                       
  |=====                                                            |   7%
  |                                                                       
  |======                                                           |   9%
  |                                                                       
  |=======                                                          |  10%
  |                                                                       
  |======================                                           |  33%
  |                                                                       
  |=====================================                            |  56%
  |                                                                       
  |====================================================             |  79%
  |                                                                       
  |================================================================ |  98%
  |                                                                       
  |=================================================================| 100%
perf.gbmh<-h2o.performance(gbm.modelh,test.h2o)
perf.gbmh
## H2OBinomialMetrics: gbm
## 
## MSE:  0.09860778
## RMSE:  0.3140188
## LogLoss:  0.3206876
## Mean Per-Class Error:  0.2120263
## AUC:  0.8630573
## Gini:  0.7261146
## 
## Confusion Matrix (vertical: actual; across: predicted) for F1-optimal threshold:
##          0  1    Error     Rate
## 0      266 48 0.152866  =48/314
## 1       16 43 0.271186   =16/59
## Totals 282 91 0.171582  =64/373
## 
## Maximum Metrics: Maximum metrics at their respective thresholds
##                       metric threshold    value idx
## 1                     max f1  0.189757 0.573333  90
## 2                     max f2  0.130895 0.693717 145
## 3               max f0point5  0.327346 0.598802  26
## 4               max accuracy  0.442757 0.876676  14
## 5              max precision  0.802184 1.000000   0
## 6                 max recall  0.049990 1.000000 284
## 7            max specificity  0.802184 1.000000   0
## 8           max absolute_mcc  0.169135 0.496486 104
## 9 max min_per_class_accuracy  0.169135 0.796610 104
## 10 max mean_per_class_accuracy  0.169135 0.805948 104
## 
## Gains/Lift Table: Extract with `h2o.gainsLift(<model>, <data>)` or `
h2o.sensitivity(perf.gbmh,0.5)
## Warning in h2o.find_row_by_threshold(object, t): Could not find exact
## threshold: 0.5 for this set of metrics; using closest threshold found:
## 0.501205344484314. Run `h2o.predict` and apply your desired threshold on a
## probability column.
## [[1]]
## [1] 0.1355932
h2o.auc(perf.gbmh)
## [1] 0.8630573

This model correctly predicts 43 top 10 hits, which is 10 more than the number predicted by Model 3. Moreover, the AUC metric is higher than the one obtained from Model 3.

As seen above, H2O’s API provides the ability to obtain key statistical measures required to analyze the models easily, using several built-in functions. The record label can experiment with different parameters to arrive at the model that predicts the maximum number of Top 10 hits at the desired level of accuracy and threshold.

H2O also allows you to experiment with deep learning models. Deep learning models have the ability to learn features implicitly, but can be more expensive computationally.

Now, create a deep learning model with the h2o.deeplearning function, using the same training and test datasets created before. The time taken to run this model depends on the type of EC2 instance chosen for this purpose.  For models that require more computation, consider using accelerated computing instances such as the P2 instance type.

system.time(
  dlearning.modelh <- h2o.deeplearning(y = y.dep,
                                      x = x.indep,
                                      training_frame = train.h2o,
                                      epoch = 250,
                                      hidden = c(250,250),
                                      activation = "Rectifier",
                                      seed = 1122,
                                      distribution="multinomial"
  )
)
## 
  |                                                                       
  |                                                                 |   0%
  |                                                                       
  |===                                                              |   4%
  |                                                                       
  |=====                                                            |   8%
  |                                                                       
  |========                                                         |  12%
  |                                                                       
  |==========                                                       |  16%
  |                                                                       
  |=============                                                    |  20%
  |                                                                       
  |================                                                 |  24%
  |                                                                       
  |==================                                               |  28%
  |                                                                       
  |=====================                                            |  32%
  |                                                                       
  |=======================                                          |  36%
  |                                                                       
  |==========================                                       |  40%
  |                                                                       
  |=============================                                    |  44%
  |                                                                       
  |===============================                                  |  48%
  |                                                                       
  |==================================                               |  52%
  |                                                                       
  |====================================                             |  56%
  |                                                                       
  |=======================================                          |  60%
  |                                                                       
  |==========================================                       |  64%
  |                                                                       
  |============================================                     |  68%
  |                                                                       
  |===============================================                  |  72%
  |                                                                       
  |=================================================                |  76%
  |                                                                       
  |====================================================             |  80%
  |                                                                       
  |=======================================================          |  84%
  |                                                                       
  |=========================================================        |  88%
  |                                                                       
  |============================================================     |  92%
  |                                                                       
  |==============================================================   |  96%
  |                                                                       
  |=================================================================| 100%
##    user  system elapsed 
##   1.216   0.020 166.508
perf.dl<-h2o.performance(model=dlearning.modelh,newdata=test.h2o)
perf.dl
## H2OBinomialMetrics: deeplearning
## 
## MSE:  0.1678359
## RMSE:  0.4096778
## LogLoss:  1.86509
## Mean Per-Class Error:  0.3433013
## AUC:  0.7568822
## Gini:  0.5137644
## 
## Confusion Matrix (vertical: actual; across: predicted) for F1-optimal threshold:
##          0  1    Error     Rate
## 0      290 24 0.076433  =24/314
## 1       36 23 0.610169   =36/59
## Totals 326 47 0.160858  =60/373
## 
## Maximum Metrics: Maximum metrics at their respective thresholds
##                       metric threshold    value idx
## 1                     max f1  0.826267 0.433962  46
## 2                     max f2  0.000000 0.588235 239
## 3               max f0point5  0.999929 0.511811  16
## 4               max accuracy  0.999999 0.865952  10
## 5              max precision  1.000000 1.000000   0
## 6                 max recall  0.000000 1.000000 326
## 7            max specificity  1.000000 1.000000   0
## 8           max absolute_mcc  0.999929 0.363219  16
## 9 max min_per_class_accuracy  0.000004 0.662420 145
## 10 max mean_per_class_accuracy  0.000000 0.685334 224
## 
## Gains/Lift Table: Extract with `h2o.gainsLift(<model>, <data>)` or `h2o.gainsLift(<model>, valid=<T/F>, xval=<T/F>)`
h2o.sensitivity(perf.dl,0.5)
## Warning in h2o.find_row_by_threshold(object, t): Could not find exact
## threshold: 0.5 for this set of metrics; using closest threshold found:
## 0.496293348880151. Run `h2o.predict` and apply your desired threshold on a
## probability column.
## [[1]]
## [1] 0.3898305
h2o.auc(perf.dl)
## [1] 0.7568822

The AUC metric for this model is 0.7568822, which is less than what you got from the earlier models. I recommend further experimentation using different hyper parameters, such as the learning rate, epoch or the number of hidden layers.

H2O’s built-in functions provide many key statistical measures that can help measure model performance. Here are some of these key terms.

Metric Description
Sensitivity Measures the proportion of positives that have been correctly identified. It is also called the true positive rate, or recall.
Specificity Measures the proportion of negatives that have been correctly identified. It is also called the true negative rate.
Threshold Cutoff point that maximizes specificity and sensitivity. While the model may not provide the highest prediction at this point, it would not be biased towards positives or negatives.
Precision The fraction of the documents retrieved that are relevant to the information needed, for example, how many of the positively classified are relevant
AUC

Provides insight into how well the classifier is able to separate the two classes. The implicit goal is to deal with situations where the sample distribution is highly skewed, with a tendency to overfit to a single class.

0.90 – 1 = excellent (A)

0.8 – 0.9 = good (B)

0.7 – 0.8 = fair (C)

.6 – 0.7 = poor (D)

0.5 – 0.5 = fail (F)

Here’s a summary of the metrics generated from H2O’s built-in functions for the three models that produced useful results.

Metric Model 3 GBM Model Deep Learning Model

Accuracy

(max)

0.882038

(t=0.435479)

0.876676

(t=0.442757)

0.865952

(t=0.999999)

Precision

(max)

1.0

(t=0.821606)

1.0

(t=0802184)

1.0

(t=1.0)

Recall

(max)

1.0 1.0

1.0

(t=0)

Specificity

(max)

1.0 1.0

1.0

(t=1)

Sensitivity

 

0.2033898 0.1355932

0.3898305

(t=0.5)

AUC 0.8492389 0.8630573 0.756882

Note: ‘t’ denotes threshold.

Your options at this point could be narrowed down to Model 3 and the GBM model, based on the AUC and accuracy metrics observed earlier.  If the slightly lower accuracy of the GBM model is deemed acceptable, the record label can choose to go to production with the GBM model, as it can predict a higher number of Top 10 hits.  The AUC metric for the GBM model is also higher than that of Model 3.

Record labels can experiment with different learning techniques and parameters before arriving at a model that proves to be the best fit for their business. Because deep learning models can be computationally expensive, record labels can choose more powerful EC2 instances on AWS to run their experiments faster.

Conclusion

In this post, I showed how the popular music industry can use analytics to predict the type of songs that make the Top 10 Billboard charts. By running H2O’s scalable machine learning platform on AWS, data scientists can easily experiment with multiple modeling techniques and interactively query the data using Amazon Athena, without having to manage the underlying infrastructure. This helps record labels make critical decisions on the type of artists and songs to promote in a timely fashion, thereby increasing sales and revenue.

If you have questions or suggestions, please comment below.


Additional Reading

Learn how to build and explore a simple geospita simple GEOINT application using SparkR.


About the Authors

gopalGopal Wunnava is a Partner Solution Architect with the AWS GSI Team. He works with partners and customers on big data engagements, and is passionate about building analytical solutions that drive business capabilities and decision making. In his spare time, he loves all things sports and movies related and is fond of old classics like Asterix, Obelix comics and Hitchcock movies.

 

 

Bob Strahan, a Senior Consultant with AWS Professional Services, contributed to this post.