HBASE-25743: Retry REQUESTTIMEOUT based KeeperExceptions in ZK client.#3131
Merged
bharathv merged 1 commit intoapache:masterfrom Apr 8, 2021
Merged
HBASE-25743: Retry REQUESTTIMEOUT based KeeperExceptions in ZK client.#3131bharathv merged 1 commit intoapache:masterfrom
bharathv merged 1 commit intoapache:masterfrom
Conversation
Starting ZOOKEEPER-2251, client requests exceeding a timeout can throw a KeeperException with REQUESTTIMEOUT opcode set. RecoverableZookeeper doesn't transparently retry in such cases.
shahrs87
reviewed
Apr 7, 2021
| retryOrThrow(retryCounter, e, "delete"); | ||
| break; | ||
| case OPERATIONTIMEOUT: | ||
| case REQUESTTIMEOUT: |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
can we add a test case for this change ?
|
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
saintstack
approved these changes
Apr 7, 2021
Contributor
saintstack
left a comment
saintstack
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM
IMO @shahrs87, this would be hard to test. We would have to manufacture zk behaviors in our context. Do you have a suggestion?
Contributor
@saintstack Is it possible to mock RecoverableZookeeper for first time to throw REQUESTTIMEOUT exception and second time it succeeds and verify the client call succeeded ? |
|
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
Contributor
|
Or subclass so could override the creation of the zk instance.... But we'd just be testing that retry 'works'? That the case catches the new enum, REQUESTTIMEOUT (which is from zk). I love tests. Just not sure it would add much in this case. Thanks @shahrs87 |
Contributor
|
@saintstack I don't have any strong opinion in this case. If you feel this patch is good, then I am +1 |
shahrs87
approved these changes
Apr 7, 2021
Contributor
Author
|
It looks like a lot of code refactoring is needed to subclass and test and mocking seems to be complex since there are no setters for internal class state that doesn't seem worth refactoring. Skipping the test for now as discussed. Thanks for the reviews. |
virajjasani
reviewed
Apr 8, 2021
Contributor
virajjasani
left a comment
virajjasani
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Belated +1, nice one @bharathv
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
5 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.
Starting ZOOKEEPER-2251, client requests exceeding a timeout can throw
a KeeperException with REQUESTTIMEOUT opcode set. RecoverableZookeeper
doesn't transparently retry in such cases.