Hi Srini,
We have tried the approach what Moiz had mentioned – using CDTCN and caching
data, and it was quite performant in one of our reference application. You may
want to look - https://git.opendaylight.org/gerrit/#/c/45131/
Regards
Muthu
From: controller-dev-boun...@lists.opendaylight.or
Hi Team,
I had struggled to update the initial configuration of the openflow plugin
after starting ODL. For example: previously when we want to change the
Openflow plugin port configuration (6633 to 6634) or transport-protocol
(tcp to tls), we just change the values in the 42-openflowplugin-*.x
The single use ClusteredDataChange/ClusteredDataTreeChange listeners are fine
and may perform better than the remote read but if you really have a lot of
reads even this mechanism is expensive as there is quite a bit of overhead
associated with setting up a listener.
I would recommend that you
All reads still go to the leader. There has been an enhancement
https://bugs.opendaylight.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2504 open for this but hasn't
been implemented. There is an alternative way using
a DataTreeChangeListener as Moiz mentioned in the bug.
On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 4:57 PM, Srini Seetharaman
With Beryllium-SR3, I just verified using tcpdump on port 2550 that the
data for the read operation at the follower came over the network from the
shard leader.
Is there any plan with Boron to make it a local read from the replica?
On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 1:43 PM, Srini Seetharaman <
srini.seetha
Hi Tom and Moiz
Is it still the case with Beryllium and Boron that the read transactions
from a follower are forwarded to the leader?
Thanks
Srini.
On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 8:26 AM, Tom Pantelis wrote:
> Colin, Tianzhu
>
> Reads are also forwarded to the leader so, yes, remote reads would take
>
No. I thought there was a bug for pipe-lining but I don't see one. Initial
patch in https://git.opendaylight.org/gerrit/#/c/28775/
On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 11:12 AM, Colin Dixon wrote:
> Is it all tracked under bug 5280?
>
> --Colin
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 2:18 PM, Robert Varga wrote:
>
>>
Is it all tracked under bug 5280?
--Colin
On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 2:18 PM, Robert Varga wrote:
> On 2016-09-13 19:39, Colin Dixon wrote:
>
>> Is that right? Is this still planned for SR1? I'm just trying to help
>> people plan their efforts for the Boron update to the performance
>> whitepaper
