Skip to content
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

PIP-122: Change loadBalancer default loadSheddingStrategy to ThresholdShedder #13340

Closed
hangc0276 opened this issue Dec 15, 2021 · 3 comments · Fixed by #13733
Closed

PIP-122: Change loadBalancer default loadSheddingStrategy to ThresholdShedder #13340

hangc0276 opened this issue Dec 15, 2021 · 3 comments · Fixed by #13733
Assignees
Labels

Comments

@hangc0276
Copy link
Contributor

Motivation

The ThresholdShedder load balance policy since Pulsar 2.6.0 by #6772. It can resolve many load balance issues of OverloadShedder and works well in many Pulsar production clusters.

In Pulsar 2.6.0, 2.7.0, 2.8.0 and 2.9.0, Pulsar's default load balance policy is OverloadShedder.

I think it's a good time for 2.10 to change default load balance policy to ThresholdShedder, it will make throughput more balance between brokers.

Proposed Changes

In 2.10 release,for broker.conf, change loadBalancerLoadSheddingStrategy from org.apache.pulsar.broker.loadbalance.impl.OverloadShedder to org.apache.pulsar.broker.loadbalance.impl.ThresholdShedder

@rdhabalia
Copy link
Contributor

this is not backward compatible change and one usecase can't make decision, this will impact existing users.

@Jason918
Copy link
Contributor

this is not backward compatible change

Hi @rdhabalia
Any specific compatible issue for this change?

@hangc0276
Copy link
Contributor Author

@rdhabalia The two load balance policy are has no state, and users can switch between them at any time. IMO, there is no incompatible issue for this change. Do you have any case for the compatible issue?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants