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-21.2: kvserver: log if lease applies with a delay #96803

Closed

Conversation

blathers-crl[bot]
Copy link

@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot commented Feb 8, 2023

Backport 1/1 commits from #96257 on behalf of @tbg.

/cc @cockroachdb/release


When we transfer a lease to a lagging follower, there's often a latency
blip that we get asked to investigate. This is time consuming; it's
often very subtle to even figure out that it happened. We try to be
better about not doing it, but at least on 22.1 we know it's possible,
and we can't backport the rather involved fixes.

This warning makes it fairly obvious when it happens.

W230131 [...] [T1,n2,s2,r23/3:‹/Table/2{1-2}›,raft] 165 lease repl=(n2,s2):3 seq=5 start=1675153630.108829000,0 epo=3 pro=1675153630.108829000,0 active after replication lag of ~0.58s; foreground traffic may have been impacted [prev=repl=(n3,s3):2 seq=4 start=1675153407.528408000,0 epo=2 pro=1675153419.837642000,0]

Addresses #95991.

Epic: none
Release note: None


Release justification:

When we transfer a lease to a lagging follower, there's often a latency
blip that we get asked to investigate. This is time consuming; it's
often very subtle to even figure out that it happened. We try to be
better about not doing it, but at least on 22.1 we know it's possible,
and we can't backport the rather involved fixes.

This warning makes it fairly obvious when it happens.

> W230131 [...] [T1,n2,s2,r23/3:‹/Table/2{1-2}›,raft] 165  lease repl=(n2,s2):3 seq=5 start=1675153630.108829000,0 epo=3 pro=1675153630.108829000,0 active after replication lag of ~0.58s; foreground traffic may have been impacted [prev=repl=(n3,s3):2 seq=4 start=1675153407.528408000,0 epo=2 pro=1675153419.837642000,0]

Also log if we're acquiring an epoch-based lease following a
non-cooperatively expired expiration-based lease, which would suggest
that a lease transfer went to a node that couldn't service the lease.
This would likely have caused an outage, and the log message will
provide a way to pinpoint its end timestamp

Addresses #95991.

Epic: none
Release note: None
@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot requested a review from a team as a code owner February 8, 2023 17:09
@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot force-pushed the blathers/backport-release-21.2-96257 branch from 882fe40 to f6fc5ee Compare February 8, 2023 17:09
@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot requested a review from erikgrinaker February 8, 2023 17:09
@blathers-crl
Copy link
Author

blathers-crl bot commented Feb 8, 2023

Thanks for opening a backport.

Please check the backport criteria before merging:

  • Patches should only be created for serious issues or test-only changes.
  • Patches should not break backwards-compatibility.
  • Patches should change as little code as possible.
  • Patches should not change on-disk formats or node communication protocols.
  • Patches should not add new functionality.
  • Patches must not add, edit, or otherwise modify cluster versions; or add version gates.
If some of the basic criteria cannot be satisfied, ensure that the exceptional criteria are satisfied within.
  • 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.
  • The PM and TL on the team that owns the changed code have signed off that the change obeys the above rules.

Add a brief release justification to the body of your PR to justify this backport.

Some other things to consider:

  • What did we do to ensure that a user that doesn’t know & care about this backport, has no idea that it happened?
  • Will this work in a cluster of mixed patch versions? Did we test that?
  • If a user upgrades a patch version, uses this feature, and then downgrades, what happens?

@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot requested a review from nvanbenschoten February 8, 2023 17:09
@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot added blathers-backport This is a backport that Blathers created automatically. O-robot Originated from a bot. labels Feb 8, 2023
@blathers-crl
Copy link
Author

blathers-crl bot commented Feb 8, 2023

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

This change is Reviewable

@erikgrinaker
Copy link
Contributor

21.2 is no longer maintained.

@tbg tbg closed this Feb 9, 2023
@mgartner mgartner deleted the blathers/backport-release-21.2-96257 branch May 23, 2023 15:03
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
blathers-backport This is a backport that Blathers created automatically. O-robot Originated from a bot.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants