scheduler: hotspot: solution-based key-rate-aware balance solver #2141
Conversation
Luffbee
added
type/enhancement
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #2141 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 76.27% 76.05% -0.23%
==========================================
Files 195 195
Lines 20577 20577
==========================================
- Hits 15696 15650 -46
- Misses 3703 3734 +31
- Partials 1178 1193 +15
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
Luffbee
changed the title
| if len(ops) > 0 { | ||
| return ops | ||
| } | ||
| // prefer to balance by peer |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
After removing the retry loop, will it affect the speed of hot spot scheduling?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I believe it won't. The the statistics data is not changed for each iteration, and new balanceSolver will try almost all possible solutions.
server/schedulers/hot_region.go
Outdated
| } | ||
| } else { | ||
| keyDecRatio := (dstLd.KeyRate + peer.GetKeyRate()) / (srcLd.KeyRate + 1) | ||
| keyHot := peer.GetKeyRate() >= 10 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It won't be used in other place, so I don't think it is necessary.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The constant is easy to maintain and the meaning is much more clear.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Add two constants: minHotByteRate and minHotKeyRate.
server/schedulers/hot_region.go
Outdated
| case read: | ||
| return readLeader | ||
| } | ||
| return resourceTypeLen |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It will only cause panic when the arguments are invalid. I think this is acceptable.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's better to panic in this function rather than use it?
| if bs.rwTy == write && bs.opTy == transferLeader { | ||
| lpCmp = sliceLPCmp( | ||
| minLPCmp(negLoadCmp(sliceLoadCmp( | ||
| stLdRankCmp(stLdCount, stepRank(bs.maxSrc.Count, bs.rankStep.Count)), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What the meaning of rankStep? it seems always the same in the rank compare.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It is used to discretization. Map float64 to int64. For all values in the interval [rank0 + i * step, rank0 + (i+1) * step), the rank the i.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Got it. If I understand correctly, the ranking i (stepRank return) can only be 0 or 1. Can this distinguish those stores very well?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No, rank i = int64((value - rank0) / step) can be any int64.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh, sorry. I missed the stepRatio, can u add some comments about step ratio?
|
/merge |
sre-bot
added
the
status/can-merge
|
/run-all-tests |
What problem does this PR solve?
The second step of #2139 .
What is changed and how it works?
Introduce solution based balance solver.
Check List
Tests