Skip to content

release-24.3: kvserver: improve logs during adminScatter #147502

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
wenyihu6 merged 2 commits into from
Jun 6, 2025
Merged

release-24.3: kvserver: improve logs during adminScatter #147502

wenyihu6 merged 2 commits into from
Jun 6, 2025

Conversation

@wenyihu6
Copy link
Contributor

@wenyihu6 wenyihu6 commented May 29, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Backport:

Please see individual PRs for details.

/cc @cockroachdb/release

Release justification: low risk observability improvements

wenyihu6 added 2 commits May 29, 2025 15:35
@wenyihu6
kvserver: improve logging during r.adminScatter
78cf892 
Previously, adminScatter did not log the number of scatter retries or the reason
for terminating the retry loop. Additionally, retry errors were only logged at a
high verbosity level. This commit improves observability by: (1) logging an
error on each retry failure, and (2) logging the reason when the retry loop
exits.

These logs are not gated behind high verbosity. We plan to evaluate their
noise level through testing, but based on support debug zips, this path should
not be very hot, and max retries are capped by the replication factor.

Part of: cockroachdb#144548
Release note: none
@wenyihu6
kvserver: improve logs during adminScatter
147596e 
Previously, the logs in adminScatter included the message "failed to scatter",
which could be misleading, as these are not always true failures and depend on
context. For example, hitting a terminating error during a retry after
rebalancing the leaseholder away doesn’t necessarily indicate a failure without
further assessment. This patch updates the log message to avoid confusion for
users searching in logs. In addition, it also changes the logging call from
log.Eventf to log.Infof, since Eventf was a mistake and not included in logs
by default.

Epic: none
Release note: none
@blathers-crl
Copy link

blathers-crl bot commented May 29, 2025

Thanks for opening a backport.

Please check the backport criteria before merging:

  • Backports should only be created for serious
    issues     or test-only changes.
  • Backports should not break backwards-compatibility.
  • Backports should change as little code as possible.
  • Backports should not change on-disk formats or node communication protocols.
  • Backports should not add new functionality (except as defined
    here).
  • Backports must not add, edit, or otherwise modify cluster versions; or add version gates.
  • All backports must be reviewed by the owning areas TL. For more information as to how that review should be conducted, please consult the backport
    policy    .
If your backport adds new functionality, please ensure that the following additional criteria are satisfied:
  • There is a high priority need for the functionality that cannot wait until the next release and is difficult to address in another way.
  • The new functionality is additive-only and only runs for clusters which have specifically “opted in” to it (e.g. by a cluster setting).
  • New code is protected by a conditional check that is trivial to verify and ensures that it only runs for opt-in clusters. State changes must be further protected such that nodes running old binaries will not be negatively impacted by the new state (with a mixed version test added).
  • The PM and TL on the team that owns the changed code have signed off that the change obeys the above rules.
  • Your backport must be accompanied by a post to the appropriate Slack
    channel (#db-backports-point-releases or #db-backports-XX-X-release) for awareness and discussion.

Also, please add a brief release justification to the body of your PR to justify this
backport.

@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot added the backport Label PR's that are backports to older release branches label May 29, 2025
@blathers-crl
Copy link

blathers-crl bot commented May 29, 2025

It looks like your PR touches production code but doesn't add or edit any test code. Did you consider adding tests to your PR?

🦉 Hoot! I am a Blathers, a bot for CockroachDB. My owner is dev-inf.

@cockroach-teamcity
Copy link
Member

cockroach-teamcity commented May 29, 2025

This change is Reviewable

@wenyihu6 wenyihu6 mentioned this pull request May 29, 2025
Closed
@wenyihu6 wenyihu6 requested a review from kvoli May 29, 2025 19:43
@wenyihu6 wenyihu6 marked this pull request as ready for review May 29, 2025 19:43
@wenyihu6 wenyihu6 requested a review from a team as a code owner May 29, 2025 19:43
@wenyihu6 wenyihu6 requested review from arulajmani and removed request for kvoli June 6, 2025 13:25
@wenyihu6 wenyihu6 merged commit e06fb82 into cockroachdb:release-24.3 Jun 6, 2025
15 checks passed
@crl-codesys-jira crl-codesys-jira added the T-admission-control Admission Control label Oct 3, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@arulajmani arulajmani arulajmani approved these changes

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

backport Label PR's that are backports to older release branches T-admission-control Admission Control v24.3.15

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@wenyihu6 @cockroach-teamcity @arulajmani @crl-codesys-jira