[Enhancement] configure S3 client rename_file operation timeout #48860
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
srlch
changed the title
srlch
changed the title
murphyatwork
previously approved these changes
Jul 25, 2024
GavinMar
approved these changes
Jul 25, 2024
kevincai
reviewed
Jul 26, 2024
Comment on lines
+346
to
+550
| config::object_storage_rename_file_request_timeout_ms = -1; | ||
| config::object_storage_request_timeout_ms = 1000; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
remember to reset the config var to default value, don't affect other test cases in case their correctness depends on the default config value.
Why I'm doing: Currently, sr use object_storage_request_timeout_ms as the S3 client request timeout. But this parameter maybe too small in some case especially using by rename_file operation for large file (1GB, for example). Timeout maybe happen in this case What I'm doing: We introduce a new BE/CN config called object_storage_rename_file_request_timeout_ms and it is used as following: 1. If object_storage_rename_file_request_timeout_ms >= 0, it will used for rename_file operation in S3 as the request timeout. 2. If object_storage_rename_file_request_timeout_ms < 0, the timeout limit for rename_file operation in S3 will be determinded by object_storage_request_timeout_ms. Signed-off-by: srlch <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: srlch <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: srlch <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: srlch <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: srlch <[email protected]>
kevincai
approved these changes
Aug 8, 2024
[FE Incremental Coverage Report]✅ pass : 0 / 0 (0%) |
[BE Incremental Coverage Report]❌ fail : 7 / 12 (58.33%) file detail
|
wyb
approved these changes
Aug 12, 2024
|
https://github.com/Mergifyio backport branch-3.3 |
✅ Backports have been created
|
mergify bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 12, 2024
Signed-off-by: srlch <[email protected]> (cherry picked from commit d2aed64)
42 tasks
wanpengfei-git
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 12, 2024
…port #48860) (#49706) Co-authored-by: srlch <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Why I'm doing:
Currently, sr use object_storage_request_timeout_ms as the S3 client request timeout. But this parameter maybe too small in some case especially using by rename_file operation for large file (1GB, for example). Timeout maybe happen in this case
What I'm doing:
We introduce a new BE/CN config called
object_storage_rename_file_request_timeout_msand it is used as following:object_storage_rename_file_request_timeout_ms>= 0, it will used for rename_file operation in S3 as the request timeout.object_storage_rename_file_request_timeout_ms< 0, the timeout limit for rename_file operation in S3 will be determinded by object_storage_request_timeout_ms.Fixes #issue
What type of PR is this:
Does this PR entail a change in behavior?
If yes, please specify the type of change:
Checklist:
Bugfix cherry-pick branch check: