[#1401] feat:(dashboard): Support deleting lost shuffle servers #1870
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
yl09099
force-pushed
the
uniffle-1869
branch
2 times, most recently
from
95953b9
to
7283732
Compare
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #1870 +/- ##
============================================
- Coverage 53.53% 53.19% -0.35%
- Complexity 2356 2989 +633
============================================
Files 368 446 +78
Lines 16852 24381 +7529
Branches 1540 2270 +730
============================================
+ Hits 9022 12969 +3947
- Misses 7303 10618 +3315
- Partials 527 794 +267 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
yl09099
force-pushed
the
uniffle-1869
branch
2 times, most recently
from
c481092
to
322e9eb
Compare
|
ping @xianjingfeng ~ |
Comment on lines
317
to
326
| if (serverId != null && !serverId.equalsIgnoreCase("")) { | ||
| Iterator<ServerNode> lostNodeIter = lostNodes.iterator(); | ||
| while (lostNodeIter.hasNext()) { | ||
| ServerNode node = lostNodeIter.next(); | ||
| if (serverId.equalsIgnoreCase(node.getId())) { | ||
| lostNodes.remove(node); | ||
| return true; | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| if (serverId != null && !serverId.equalsIgnoreCase("")) { | |
| Iterator<ServerNode> lostNodeIter = lostNodes.iterator(); | |
| while (lostNodeIter.hasNext()) { | |
| ServerNode node = lostNodeIter.next(); | |
| if (serverId.equalsIgnoreCase(node.getId())) { | |
| lostNodes.remove(node); | |
| return true; | |
| } | |
| } | |
| } | |
| if (StringUtils.isNotBlank(serverId)) { | |
| lostNodes.remove(new ServerNode(serverId)); | |
| } |
Maybe this works, you can try it.
| if (clusterManager.deleteLostServerById(serverId)) { | ||
| return Response.success("success"); | ||
| } | ||
| return Response.success("failed"); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is a bit weird. Why not use Response.fail?
Comment on lines
154
to
169
| if (router.currentRoute.value.name === 'activeNodeList') { | ||
| isShowRemove.value = false | ||
| getShuffleActiveNodesPage() | ||
| } else if (router.currentRoute.value.name === 'decommissioningNodeList') { | ||
| isShowRemove.value = false | ||
| getShuffleDecommissioningListPage() | ||
| } else if (router.currentRoute.value.name === 'decommissionedNodeList') { | ||
| isShowRemove.value = false | ||
| getShuffleDecommissionedListPage() | ||
| } else if (router.currentRoute.value.name === 'unhealthyNodeList') { | ||
| isShowRemove.value = false | ||
| getShuffleUnhealthyListPage() | ||
| } else if (router.currentRoute.value.name === 'lostNodeList') { | ||
| isShowRemove.value = true | ||
| getShuffleLostListPage() | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| if (router.currentRoute.value.name === 'activeNodeList') { | |
| isShowRemove.value = false | |
| getShuffleActiveNodesPage() | |
| } else if (router.currentRoute.value.name === 'decommissioningNodeList') { | |
| isShowRemove.value = false | |
| getShuffleDecommissioningListPage() | |
| } else if (router.currentRoute.value.name === 'decommissionedNodeList') { | |
| isShowRemove.value = false | |
| getShuffleDecommissionedListPage() | |
| } else if (router.currentRoute.value.name === 'unhealthyNodeList') { | |
| isShowRemove.value = false | |
| getShuffleUnhealthyListPage() | |
| } else if (router.currentRoute.value.name === 'lostNodeList') { | |
| isShowRemove.value = true | |
| getShuffleLostListPage() | |
| } | |
| isShowRemove.value = false | |
| if (router.currentRoute.value.name === 'activeNodeList') { | |
| getShuffleActiveNodesPage() | |
| } else if (router.currentRoute.value.name === 'decommissioningNodeList') { | |
| getShuffleDecommissioningListPage() | |
| } else if (router.currentRoute.value.name === 'decommissionedNodeList') { | |
| getShuffleDecommissionedListPage() | |
| } else if (router.currentRoute.value.name === 'unhealthyNodeList') { | |
| getShuffleUnhealthyListPage() | |
| } else if (router.currentRoute.value.name === 'lostNodeList') { | |
| isShowRemove.value = true | |
| getShuffleLostListPage() | |
| } |
Comment on lines
56
to
61
| if (typeof headers !== 'undefined') { | ||
| headers.targetAddress = currentServerStore.currentServer | ||
| } else { | ||
| headers = {} | ||
| headers.targetAddress = currentServerStore.currentServer | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| if (typeof headers !== 'undefined') { | |
| headers.targetAddress = currentServerStore.currentServer | |
| } else { | |
| headers = {} | |
| headers.targetAddress = currentServerStore.currentServer | |
| } | |
| if (headers) { | |
| headers.targetAddress = currentServerStore.currentServer | |
| } else { | |
| headers = { targetAddress : currentServerStore.currentServer} | |
| } |
Maybe this works, I'm not sure.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The points you mentioned have been revised.@xianjingfeng
rickyma
changed the title
|
Merged to master. Thanks @yl09099 @xianjingfeng |
3 tasks
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.
What changes were proposed in this pull request?
Support deleting lost shuffle servers:
If some shuffle servers are lost, they need to go offline and the Coordinator has been in the lost state.
Add the delete function to delete these servers in the memory.
Why are the changes needed?
Fix: #1401
Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
Yes.
How was this patch tested?
Add UT.