BOOKKEEPER-961 - Assing read/write requests for same ledger to a single thread#69
Closed
merlimat wants to merge 1 commit into
Closed
BOOKKEEPER-961 - Assing read/write requests for same ledger to a single thread#69merlimat wants to merge 1 commit into
merlimat wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
merlimat
force-pushed
the
bk-fixed-ledger-thread
branch
from
580917c to
570faa1
Compare
kishorekasi
pushed a commit
to kishorekasi/bookkeeper
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 18, 2017
…/write requests for same ledger to a single thread
patch did not apply cleanly but mergetool resolved conflicts automatically.
Three of *ProcessorV3.java required minor changes for build to compile, all tests passed after that.
reviewed by Charan.
commit 7673feb
Author: Matteo Merli <mmerli@apache.org>
Date: Fri Nov 11 18:35:13 2016 -0800
BOOKKEEPER-961: Assign read/write requests for same ledger to a single thread
When entries for the same ledger are processed by the bookie we should avoid
the reordering of the request. Currently, if multiple read/write threads are
configured, the requests will be passed to the executor and writes for same
ledger will be spread across multiple threads.
This poses 2 issues:
1. Mutex contention to access the LedgerDescriptor
2. If the client receives add-entry acks out of order it has anyway to wait
for the acks of previous entries before acknowledging the whole sequence
to the application. In practice, the reordering is increasing the latency
experienced by the application.
Author: Matteo Merli <mmerli@yahoo-inc.com>
Reviewers: Sijie Guo <sijie@apache.org>
Closes apache#69 from merlimat/bk-fixed-ledger-thread
sijie
added a commit
to sijie/bookkeeper
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 26, 2018
merge code change on remove unused methods in BKLogHandler. Author: Sijie Guo <sijie@apache.org> Author: Sijie Guo <sijieg@twitter.com> Author: Leigh Stewart <lstewart@twitter.com> Author: Jordan Bull <jbull@twitter.com> Author: Dave Rusek <dave.rusek@gmail.com> Author: Dave Rusek <drusek@twitter.com> Reviewers: Leigh Stewart <lstewart@apache.org> Closes apache#69 from sijie/merge/DL-97
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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.
When entries for the same ledger are processed by the bookie we should avoid
the reordering of the request. Currently, if multiple read/write threads are
configured, the requests will be passed to the executor and writes for same
ledger will be spread across multiple threads.
This poses 2 issues:
for the acks of previous entries before acknowledging the whole sequence
to the application. In practice, the reordering is increasing the latency
experienced by the application.