HBASE-27752: Update the block cache and list of prefetched files upon region movement #5194
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
💔 -1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
💔 -1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
wchevreuil
reviewed
Apr 21, 2023
Contributor
wchevreuil
left a comment
wchevreuil
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks like this change has impacted TestPrefetchRSClose.testPrefetchPersistence?
Comment on lines
108
to
119
| rsServices.getBlockCache().ifPresent(blockCache -> { | ||
| if (blockCache instanceof CombinedBlockCache) { | ||
| BlockCache l2 = ((CombinedBlockCache)blockCache).getSecondLevelCache(); | ||
| if (l2 instanceof BucketCache) { | ||
| if (region.getReadOnlyConfiguration().get(PREFETCH_PERSISTENCE_PATH_KEY) != null) { | ||
| LOG.info("Closing region {} during a graceful stop, and prefetch persistence is on, " | ||
| + "so setting evict on close to false. ", region.getRegionInfo().getEncodedName()); | ||
| region.getStores().forEach(s -> s.getCacheConfig().setEvictOnClose(false)); | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| }); | ||
|
|
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I know I've done something similar in UnassignRegionHandler for HBASE-27474, but I wonder now if we should move these logic about evict decision to a related methods in HRegion.
|
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
💔 -1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
💔 -1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
wchevreuil
reviewed
Apr 27, 2023
| return close(abort, false, false); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| public Map<byte[], List<HStoreFile>> close(boolean abort, boolean isGracefulStop) |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think there's some confusion with the parameters here. We should keep the original signature public Map<byte[], List<HStoreFile>> close(boolean abort, boolean ignoreStatus) and pass ignoreStatus along in the delegating call (here we are always forcing it to false). Could it be behind the latest UT failureS?
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@wchevreuil I have addressed this feedback. However, the previous UTs are probably not failing with this change here. Let's wait for the pre-commit to see how it goes this time.
|
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
wchevreuil
reviewed
May 2, 2023
| return close(abort, false); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| public Map<byte[], List<HStoreFile>> close(boolean abort, boolean ignoreStatus) |
wchevreuil
reviewed
May 2, 2023
| */ | ||
| public Map<byte[], List<HStoreFile>> close(boolean abort, boolean ignoreStatus) | ||
| throws IOException { | ||
| public Map<byte[], List<HStoreFile>> close(boolean abort, boolean ignoreStatus, |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nit: update javadoc with the additional param.
|
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
wchevreuil
reviewed
May 3, 2023
| LOG.debug("Prefetch cancelled for {}", path); | ||
| } | ||
| prefetchCompleted.remove(path.getName()); | ||
| LOG.debug("Removing filename from the prefetched persistence list: " + path.getName()); |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nit: use parameterised log4j messaging.
|
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
💔 -1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
Contributor
Author
|
Thank you, @wchevreuil |
Kota-SH
added a commit
to Kota-SH/hbase
that referenced
this pull request
May 5, 2023
…apache#5194) Co-authored-by: Shanmukha Kota <[email protected]> (cherry picked from commit ece8d01)
Kota-SH
added a commit
to Kota-SH/hbase
that referenced
this pull request
May 5, 2023
…apache#5194) Co-authored-by: Shanmukha Kota <[email protected]> (cherry picked from commit ece8d01)
wchevreuil
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 5, 2023
…#5194) Signed-off-by: Wellington Chevreuil <[email protected]>
wchevreuil
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 9, 2023
…#5194) (#5222) Signed-off-by: Wellington Chevreuil <[email protected]> (cherry picked from commit ece8d01)
vinayakphegde
pushed a commit
to vinayakphegde/hbase
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 4, 2024
…ion movement (apache#5194) (apache#5222) Signed-off-by: Wellington Chevreuil <[email protected]> (cherry picked from commit ece8d01) Change-Id: Ia5e78112b49c576e094c9479001e4de9abb006fe
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The prefetch persistence feature requires setting evict on close to false to avoid evictions during a graceful restart. This however causes problems for normal moves (such as those triggered by balancer or manual movement), as now the blocks for moved regions would stay in the cache indefinitely.
Blocks in BucketCache should not be evicted when cache/prefetch persistence is enabled and should be evicted when a region is closed due to other reasons.
Jira: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-27752