I think we need a vote thread to Merge. Please send out a vote and then we can merge, if you like I can send out the vote thread today
—Anu > On Feb 8, 2020, at 3:10 AM, timmycheng(程力) <[email protected]> wrote: > > Thank you all! I will start the merge to master process soon. > > -Li > > 在 2020/2/8 下åˆ1:15，“sammichen(陈怡)â€<[email protected]> > 写入: > > +1 from me too. > > Sammi > > On 2020/2/8, 6:00 AM, "Anu Engineer" <[email protected]> wrote: > > +1 from me too > > —Anu > >> On Feb 7, 2020, at 1:47 PM, Siddharth Wagle <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> Agree with Xiaoyu, +1 for the merge. >> >> Thanks, Li Cheng for working on this feature and taking it to completion. >> >> Best, >> Sid >> >>>> On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 1:38 PM Xiaoyu Yao <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>> >>> Thanks for sharing the data. Given the issues raised earlier have been >>> addressed in the follow up JIRA. I'm +1 for merge. >>> >>> Xiaoyu >>> >>> On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 8:34 AM timmycheng(程力) <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hey all, >>>> >>>> Just wanna follow up on multi-raft feature progress. I’ve collect some >>>> feedbacks from Xiaoyu, Anu and Sid ( >>>> >>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NxCiHhn0u9BqgjuUXB8zxGtny69Qek4yTFe1QqUHiqM/edit >>> ) >>>> and address them all in HDDS-2913. Shout out to Xiaoyu, Anu and Sid for >>> the >>>> feedbacks and help on resolving them as well. Also would like to know if >>>> there are other comments and reviews. >>>> >>>> We at Tencent has already deployed the multi-raft version to our internal >>>> production cluster and it’s serving reasonable amount of traffic now. So >>>> far there are over 16K times of write into our Ozone cluster and I >>> compare >>>> with the single-raft version’s performance. Both are measured in similar >>>> pattern of traffic on daily basis. >>>> >>>> Write finishes in: >>>> >>>> Single raft >>>> >>>> Multi raft >>>> >>>>> 3s >>>> >>>> 0.009% >>>> >>>> 0.006% >>>> >>>> 2s ~ 3s >>>> >>>> 27.4% >>>> >>>> 1.46% >>>> >>>> 1s ~ 2s >>>> >>>> 1.64% >>>> >>>> 0.07% >>>> >>>> 0.2s ~ 1s >>>> >>>> 2.7% >>>> >>>> 0.53% >>>> >>>> < 0.2s >>>> >>>> 68.2% >>>> >>>> 97.9% >>>> >>>> >>>> Our internal customer writes to ozone every day and there are schedules >>>> jobs as well as on-demand jobs. Size could be from KB to GB every write, >>>> but every daes y’s traffic share the same pattern. Therefore, we see that >>>> multi-raft version makes ~98% of write finish within 0.2s, which is 20% >>>> more than what single-raft version can do. At the same time, those who >>>> finishes from 2s to 3s reduces from 27.4% to 1.46%. Multi-raft has made >>> our >>>> internal cluster more stable and the latency fluctuates way less, which >>> is >>>> pretty helpful. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Li >>>> >>>> å‘件人: "timmycheng(程力)" <[email protected]> >>>> 日期: 2020å¹´1月13æ—¥ 星期一 下åˆ4:24 >>>> 收件人: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> >>>> 主题: [DISCUSS] - Merge Multi-Raft Support - HDDS-1564 >>>> >>>> Hey all, >>>> >>>> Happy to present the multi-raft feature to ozone community ( >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDDS-1564). This feature is to >>>> allow every datanode to host more than 1 pipeline based on user config to >>>> better utilize every datanode’s disks IO. >>>> >>>> All dev work have been done and I’ve conducted performance tests in >>>> different scenarios. Based on my testing, multi-raft ozone cluster can >>> help >>>> to make writing latency as low as 1/3 of single-raft’s one. Please check >>>> the attachment in the above JIRA for test brief and more details as well >>> as >>>> the code patch. >>>> >>>> I would like to use this thread to discuss about this feature and it’s >>>> merge back to master. >>>> >>>> -Li >>>> >>> > > > > > > B‹KKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKCB•È [œÝXœØÜšX™KK[XZ[ˆÞ›Û™KY]‹][œÝXœØÜšX™PYÛÜ > ˜\XÚK›Ü™ÃB‘›ÜˆY][Û˜[ÛÛ[X[™ ËK[XZ[ˆÞ›Û™KY]‹Z[ YÛÜ > ˜\XÚK›Ü™ÃBƒB --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
