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

release-2.1: storage: re-enqueue Raft groups on paginated application #31619

Merged

Conversation

nvanbenschoten
Copy link
Member

Backport:

Please see individual PRs for details.

The first commit is from #31408. I don't love that I needed to backport it, but I also can't easily test the rest of the change without it.

/cc @cockroachdb/release

@nvanbenschoten nvanbenschoten requested review from bdarnell, tbg and a team October 19, 2018 00:07
@cockroach-teamcity
Copy link
Member

This change is Reviewable

@nvanbenschoten nvanbenschoten force-pushed the backport2.1-31408-31568 branch from 53d91f3 to d4e6fb8 Compare October 19, 2018 22:22
Copy link
Contributor

@bdarnell bdarnell left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

:lgtm:

I would also have been OK with merging this without a test and without the first commit (but it's fine as-is)

Reviewable status: :shipit: complete! 0 of 0 LGTMs obtained (and 1 stale)

This centralizes all Raft configuration and makes it easier
to configure in tests.

Release note: None
Fixes cockroachdb#31330.

This change re-enqueues Raft groups for processing immediately if they
still have more to do after a Raft ready iteration. This comes up in
practice when a Range has sufficient load to force Raft application
pagination. See cockroachdb#31330 for a discussion on the symptoms this can
cause.

Release note (bug fix): Fix bug where Raft followers could fall behind
leaders will entry application, causing stalls during splits.
@tbg tbg force-pushed the backport2.1-31408-31568 branch from d4e6fb8 to e24dd67 Compare October 23, 2018 08:28
@tbg
Copy link
Member

tbg commented Oct 23, 2018

@nvanbenschoten I'm getting this in for you.

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants