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

variable: make backoff weight could be 0 #30664

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Mar 29, 2022
Merged

Conversation

jackysp
Copy link
Member

@jackysp jackysp commented Dec 13, 2021

Signed-off-by: Shuaipeng Yu [email protected]

What problem does this PR solve?

Issue Number: close #32592

Problem Summary:
TiDB always uses backoff to resolve some internal errors, e.g., node failures, but in some cases a fast failure may be a better choice because it will give the user a clear ack quickly, rather than looking like it hung.

What is changed and how it works?

Allow tidb_backoff_weight to be set to 0 to turn off backoff mechanism.

Check List

Tests

  • Unit test
  • Integration test
  • Manual test (add detailed scripts or steps below)
  1. run some sysbench benchmark on a cluster and set global tidb_backoff_weight = 0
  2. the cluster run as normal with no node failure.
  • No code

Side effects

  • Performance regression: Consumes more CPU
  • Performance regression: Consumes more Memory
  • Breaking backward compatibility

Documentation

  • Affects user behaviors
  • Contains syntax changes
  • Contains variable changes
  • Contains experimental features
  • Changes MySQL compatibility

Release note

None

@jackysp jackysp added the type/enhancement The issue or PR belongs to an enhancement. label Dec 13, 2021
@jackysp jackysp requested a review from a team as a code owner December 13, 2021 08:41
@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Member

ti-chi-bot commented Dec 13, 2021

[REVIEW NOTIFICATION]

This pull request has been approved by:

  • bb7133
  • morgo

To complete the pull request process, please ask the reviewers in the list to review by filling /cc @reviewer in the comment.
After your PR has acquired the required number of LGTMs, you can assign this pull request to the committer in the list by filling /assign @committer in the comment to help you merge this pull request.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Reviewer can indicate their review by submitting an approval review.
Reviewer can cancel approval by submitting a request changes review.

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Dec 13, 2021
@jackysp
Copy link
Member Author

jackysp commented Dec 13, 2021

/run-unit-test

Copy link
Contributor

@djshow832 djshow832 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Please add tests to verify that the retrying mechanism still works fine when the weight is set to 0.

@jackysp jackysp marked this pull request as draft December 16, 2021 07:46
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Dec 16, 2021
@sre-bot
Copy link
Contributor

sre-bot commented Feb 7, 2022

@jackysp jackysp marked this pull request as ready for review February 7, 2022 11:41
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Feb 7, 2022
@jackysp
Copy link
Member Author

jackysp commented Feb 7, 2022

Please add tests to verify that the retrying mechanism still works fine when the weight is set to 0.

Setting it to 0 actually disables the retrying mechanism, so it should not work. I actually tested the benchmark test manually with Sysbench for data import and oltp workload, and the cluster behaved normally with no node failures. @djshow832

@jackysp
Copy link
Member Author

jackysp commented Feb 24, 2022

PTAL @djshow832 @bb7133

@jackysp
Copy link
Member Author

jackysp commented Mar 22, 2022

PTAL @djshow832 @bb7133

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added the status/LGT1 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 1. label Mar 22, 2022
Copy link
Member

@bb7133 bb7133 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added status/LGT2 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 2. and removed status/LGT1 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 1. labels Mar 29, 2022
@bb7133
Copy link
Member

bb7133 commented Mar 29, 2022

/merge

@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Member

This pull request has been accepted and is ready to merge.

Commit hash: df7a73f

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added the status/can-merge Indicates a PR has been approved by a committer. label Mar 29, 2022
@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Member

@jackysp: Your PR was out of date, I have automatically updated it for you.

At the same time I will also trigger all tests for you:

/run-all-tests

If the CI test fails, you just re-trigger the test that failed and the bot will merge the PR for you after the CI passes.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the ti-community-infra/tichi repository.

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot merged commit 5bf5e35 into pingcap:master Mar 29, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. status/can-merge Indicates a PR has been approved by a committer. status/LGT2 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 2. type/enhancement The issue or PR belongs to an enhancement.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Make TiDB to report errors quickly
6 participants