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

Change remote store restore cluster state priority to URGENT #16281

Merged

Conversation

sachinpkale
Copy link
Member

@sachinpkale sachinpkale commented Oct 11, 2024

Description

  • Currently, remote store restore cluster state update has NORMAL priority.
  • Given that remote store restore is triggered when cluster has unassigned shards, it becomes important to trigger restore as soon as possible.
  • Due to NORMAL priority, it is possible that other HIGH/URGENT priority tasks will delay the restore process.
  • In this PR, we are changing the remote store restore cluster state update priority from NORMAL to URGENT.

Check List

  • [ ] Functionality includes testing.
  • [ ] API changes companion pull request created, if applicable.
  • [ ] Public documentation issue/PR created, if applicable.

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.
For more information on following Developer Certificate of Origin and signing off your commits, please check here.

Copy link
Contributor

❌ Gradle check result for 60b6322: FAILURE

Please examine the workflow log, locate, and copy-paste the failure(s) below, then iterate to green. Is the failure a flaky test unrelated to your change?

Copy link
Contributor

❌ Gradle check result for 60b6322: FAILURE

Please examine the workflow log, locate, and copy-paste the failure(s) below, then iterate to green. Is the failure a flaky test unrelated to your change?

Copy link
Member

@ashking94 ashking94 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can we verify that changing the priority of this task can lead to starvation of other URGENT, HIGH priority tasks? It appears that the remote store restore task execution itself should not take much time. However, good to verify.

Copy link
Contributor

✅ Gradle check result for 60b6322: SUCCESS

Copy link

codecov bot commented Oct 11, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 0% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 72.02%. Comparing base (691f725) to head (60b6322).
Report is 4 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
...arch/index/recovery/RemoteStoreRestoreService.java 0.00% 1 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main   #16281      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     72.06%   72.02%   -0.04%     
+ Complexity    64822    64820       -2     
============================================
  Files          5308     5308              
  Lines        302574   302565       -9     
  Branches      43710    43710              
============================================
- Hits         218048   217923     -125     
- Misses        66648    66785     +137     
+ Partials      17878    17857      -21     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@sachinpkale
Copy link
Member Author

Can we verify that changing the priority of this task can lead to starvation of other URGENT, HIGH priority tasks? It appears that the remote store restore task execution itself should not take much time. However, good to verify.

Yes, this is verified. As part of cluster state update, we build routing table.

@sachinpkale sachinpkale merged commit d6ea8eb into opensearch-project:main Oct 11, 2024
62 of 64 checks passed
@sachinpkale sachinpkale added the backport 2.x Backport to 2.x branch label Oct 11, 2024
opensearch-trigger-bot bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 11, 2024
Signed-off-by: Sachin Kale <[email protected]>
(cherry picked from commit d6ea8eb)
Signed-off-by: github-actions[bot] <github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
ashking94 pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 11, 2024
…#16283)

(cherry picked from commit d6ea8eb)

Signed-off-by: Sachin Kale <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: github-actions[bot] <github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
dk2k pushed a commit to dk2k/OpenSearch that referenced this pull request Oct 16, 2024
dk2k pushed a commit to dk2k/OpenSearch that referenced this pull request Oct 17, 2024
dk2k pushed a commit to dk2k/OpenSearch that referenced this pull request Oct 21, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
backport 2.x Backport to 2.x branch skip-changelog
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants