Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

store/copr: batch replica read #42237

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Mar 19, 2023
Merged

store/copr: batch replica read #42237

merged 3 commits into from
Mar 19, 2023

Conversation

you06
Copy link
Contributor

@you06 you06 commented Mar 15, 2023 •
edited
Loading

What problem does this PR solve?

Issue Number: close #42322

Problem Summary:

Currently, store batched coprocessor is not compatible with load-based replica read.

What is changed and how it works?

This PR makes them compatible.

Check List

Tests

  • Unit test
  • Integration test
  • Manual test (add detailed scripts or steps below)
  • No code

Side effects

  • Performance regression: Consumes more CPU
  • Performance regression: Consumes more Memory
  • Breaking backward compatibility

Documentation

  • Affects user behaviors
  • Contains syntax changes
  • Contains variable changes
  • Contains experimental features
  • Changes MySQL compatibility

Release note

Please refer to Release Notes Language Style Guide to write a quality release note.

None

@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Member

ti-chi-bot commented Mar 15, 2023 •
edited
Loading

[REVIEW NOTIFICATION]

This pull request has been approved by:

  • cfzjywxk
  • ekexium

To complete the pull request process, please ask the reviewers in the list to review by filling /cc @reviewer in the comment.
After your PR has acquired the required number of LGTMs, you can assign this pull request to the committer in the list by filling /assign @committer in the comment to help you merge this pull request.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Reviewer can indicate their review by submitting an approval review.
Reviewer can cancel approval by submitting a request changes review.

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added do-not-merge/needs-linked-issue release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Mar 15, 2023
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Mar 15, 2023
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. and removed do-not-merge/needs-linked-issue labels Mar 16, 2023
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Mar 17, 2023
cfzjywxk
cfzjywxk reviewed Mar 17, 2023
View reviewed changes
store/copr/coprocessor.go Show resolved Hide resolved
store/copr/coprocessor.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
cfzjywxk
cfzjywxk reviewed Mar 17, 2023
View reviewed changes
store/copr/coprocessor.go
@@ -1158,6 +1169,11 @@ func (worker *copIteratorWorker) handleTaskOnce(bo *Backoffer, task *copTask, ch
if len(worker.req.MatchStoreLabels) > 0 {
ops = append(ops, tikv.WithMatchLabels(worker.req.MatchStoreLabels))
}
if task.redirect2Replica != nil {
req.ReplicaRead = true
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Should we move the setting busyThreshold=0 here so none of the changes would be missing?

cfzjywxk
cfzjywxk reviewed Mar 17, 2023
View reviewed changes
store/copr/coprocessor.go Outdated
if err != nil {
return err
}
if batchedTask == nil {
return nil
}
if idx, ok := b.store2Idx[batchedTask.storeID]; !ok || len(b.tasks[idx].batchTaskList) >= b.limit {
if b.replicaRead == kv.ReplicaReadFollower {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The replicaRead is a bit confusing, maybe loadbasedReplicaRetry like name is more clear.

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Mar 17, 2023
@you06
compatible batch copr with load-based replica read
67e463f 
Signed-off-by: you06 <you1474600@gmail.com>
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Mar 17, 2023
@you06
update
b9d5044 
Signed-off-by: you06 <you1474600@gmail.com>
ekexium
ekexium reviewed Mar 17, 2023
View reviewed changes
store/copr/coprocessor.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
store/copr/coprocessor.go
worker.storeBatchedFallbackNum.Add(uint64(len(remainTasks)))
if !busyThresholdFallback {
worker.storeBatchedNum.Add(uint64(batchedNum - len(remainTasks)))
worker.storeBatchedFallbackNum.Add(uint64(len(remainTasks)))
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is it supposed to be put in an else clause?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The counter will be increased when handling the responses of the follower tasks.

store/copr/coprocessor.go Show resolved Hide resolved
@you06
address comment
4ed6972 
Signed-off-by: you06 <you1474600@gmail.com>
cfzjywxk
cfzjywxk approved these changes Mar 17, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@cfzjywxk cfzjywxk left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added the status/LGT1 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 1. label Mar 17, 2023
@cfzjywxk cfzjywxk requested a review from ekexium March 17, 2023 12:21
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added status/LGT2 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 2. and removed status/LGT1 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 1. labels Mar 17, 2023
@you06
Copy link
Contributor Author

you06 commented Mar 19, 2023

/merge

@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Member

This pull request has been accepted and is ready to merge.

Commit hash: 4ed6972

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added the status/can-merge Indicates a PR has been approved by a committer. label Mar 19, 2023
@you06
Copy link
Contributor Author

you06 commented Mar 19, 2023

/retest

2 similar comments
@you06
Copy link
Contributor Author

you06 commented Mar 19, 2023

/retest

@you06
Copy link
Contributor Author

you06 commented Mar 19, 2023

/retest

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot merged commit 3f8b0cc into pingcap:master Mar 19, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@ekexium ekexium ekexium approved these changes

@cfzjywxk cfzjywxk cfzjywxk approved these changes

@MyonKeminta MyonKeminta Awaiting requested review from MyonKeminta

@zyguan zyguan Awaiting requested review from zyguan

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. status/can-merge Indicates a PR has been approved by a committer. status/LGT2 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 2.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Compatible batch copr with load-based replica read
4 participants
@you06 @ti-chi-bot @cfzjywxk @ekexium