-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.6k
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.
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
[fix][broker] Set ServiceUnitStateChannel topic compaction threshold explicitly, improve getOwnerAsync, and fix other bugs #22064
[fix][broker] Set ServiceUnitStateChannel topic compaction threshold explicitly, improve getOwnerAsync, and fix other bugs #22064
Conversation
pulsar-client/src/main/java/org/apache/pulsar/client/impl/TableViewImpl.java
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...n/java/org/apache/pulsar/broker/loadbalance/extensions/store/TableViewLoadDataStoreImpl.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...src/main/java/org/apache/pulsar/broker/loadbalance/extensions/ExtensibleLoadManagerImpl.java
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...src/main/java/org/apache/pulsar/broker/loadbalance/extensions/ExtensibleLoadManagerImpl.java
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...n/java/org/apache/pulsar/broker/loadbalance/extensions/store/TableViewLoadDataStoreImpl.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
verify(primaryLoadManager, times(1)).getBrokerSelectionStrategy(); | ||
verify(secondaryLoadManager, times(0)).getBrokerSelectionStrategy(); | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Just noticed that this was removed. Do you know if this was necessary? I was just preparing a fix for the test, as it was flaky: dragosvictor#13.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
the selection cannot be fully controlled because the TopicPolicy topics can be also impacted during the test.
@@ -187,6 +187,7 @@ public ByteBuf toByteBuf() { | |||
idData.writeTo(buf); | |||
buf.writeInt(metadataAndPayload.readableBytes()); | |||
buf.writeBytes(metadataAndPayload); | |||
metadataAndPayload.release(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@heesung-sn how did you find this issue? I think this could deserve a separate PR for maintenance branches? Please report a separate issue in apache/pulsar issues to track this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, actually, I am trying to see if I can cherry-pick this PR to the branch-3.0 and others.
If not easy, I will raise separate PRs to them.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Just add a marker: This PR fixed broker-side memory leaks; it only affects when you enable ExtensibleLoadManager
@heesung-sn Is there a need to backport the ExtensibleLoadManager related fixes all the way to 3.0.x ? |
Yes, I am trying to backport other PRs. This one, too. |
…explicitly, improve getOwnerAsync, and fix other bugs (apache#22064) (cherry picked from commit 5a614e9)
@lhotari @Demogorgon314 plz review this cherry-pick PR : #22154 |
…explicitly, improve getOwnerAsync, and fix other bugs (apache#22064)
…n threshold explicitly, improve getOwnerAsync, and fix other bugs (apache#22064) (apache#22154) (cherry picked from commit 6df0265) (cherry picked from commit 6d2ce89)
…n threshold explicitly, improve getOwnerAsync, and fix other bugs (apache#22064) (apache#22154) (cherry picked from commit 6df0265) (cherry picked from commit 6d2ce89)
Motivation
We better set the compaction threshold of the serviceUnitStateChannel topic instead of relying on other components' init.
Also, we need to fix the issue that lookup and unload often timeout with 500 error.
Modifications
Verifying this change
Does this pull request potentially affect one of the following parts:
If the box was checked, please highlight the changes
Documentation
doc
doc-required
doc-not-needed
doc-complete
Matching PR in forked repository
PR in forked repository: heesung-sn#61