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

Scatter: make peer scatter logic same with the leader #6965

Merged
merged 10 commits into from
Sep 1, 2023

Conversation

bufferflies
Copy link
Contributor

@bufferflies bufferflies commented Aug 16, 2023

What problem does this PR solve?

Issue Number: Close #6962

What is changed and how does it work?

In past, PD conside peer distribution in the different group influenece by using `TotalCountByStore` , but not include the leader distribution. The max used situation is partition table. 
After this pr, TIDB call scatter api will use same group not different. 

ref:
https://github.com/tikv/pd/pull/3422
https://github.com/pingcap/tidb/pull/46156

Check List

Tests

  • Unit test
  • Integration test
  • Manual test (add detailed scripts or steps below)
  • No code

Code changes

Side effects

Related changes

Release note

None.

Signed-off-by: bufferflies <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: bufferflies <[email protected]>
@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Contributor

ti-chi-bot bot commented Aug 16, 2023

[REVIEW NOTIFICATION]

This pull request has been approved by:

  • CabinfeverB
  • rleungx

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 bot added do-not-merge/needs-linked-issue release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. labels Aug 16, 2023
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot bot requested review from disksing and nolouch August 16, 2023 12:50
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot bot added the size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. label Aug 16, 2023
Signed-off-by: bufferflies <[email protected]>
@CabinfeverB CabinfeverB self-requested a review August 16, 2023 13:00
Signed-off-by: bufferflies <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: bufferflies <[email protected]>
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Aug 22, 2023

Codecov Report

Merging #6965 (b8e2f61) into master (9a574ed) will increase coverage by 0.13%.
Report is 4 commits behind head on master.
The diff coverage is 85.71%.

❗ Current head b8e2f61 differs from pull request most recent head 9783c53. Consider uploading reports for the commit 9783c53 to get more accurate results

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #6965      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   74.33%   74.47%   +0.13%     
==========================================
  Files         433      427       -6     
  Lines       46097    45339     -758     
==========================================
- Hits        34265    33764     -501     
+ Misses       8830     8616     -214     
+ Partials     3002     2959      -43     
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 74.47% <85.71%> (+0.13%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

@CabinfeverB
Copy link
Member

/check-issue-triage-complete

Signed-off-by: bufferflies <[email protected]>
Copy link
Member

@CabinfeverB CabinfeverB left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Which branches do we need to cherry pick

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot bot added status/LGT2 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 2. and removed status/LGT1 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 1. labels Aug 31, 2023
@bufferflies
Copy link
Contributor Author

Which branches do we need to cherry pick

will follow pingcap/tidb#46156.

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot bot added needs-cherry-pick-release-6.1 Should cherry pick this PR to release-6.1 branch. needs-cherry-pick-release-6.5 Should cherry pick this PR to release-6.5 branch. needs-cherry-pick-release-7.1 Should cherry pick this PR to release-7.1 branch. labels Sep 1, 2023
@bufferflies
Copy link
Contributor Author

/merge

@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Contributor

ti-chi-bot bot commented Sep 1, 2023

@bufferflies: It seems you want to merge this PR, I will help you trigger all the tests:

/run-all-tests

You only need to trigger /merge once, and 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.

If you have any questions about the PR merge process, please refer to pr process.

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
Copy link
Contributor

ti-chi-bot bot commented Sep 1, 2023

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

Commit hash: 9783c53

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot bot added the status/can-merge Indicates a PR has been approved by a committer. label Sep 1, 2023
@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Contributor

ti-chi-bot bot commented Sep 1, 2023

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

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 bot merged commit 72a13c0 into tikv:master Sep 1, 2023
19 checks passed
@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Member

In response to a cherrypick label: new pull request created to branch release-6.1: #7026.

ti-chi-bot pushed a commit to ti-chi-bot/pd that referenced this pull request Sep 1, 2023
@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Member

In response to a cherrypick label: new pull request created to branch release-6.5: #7027.

ti-chi-bot pushed a commit to ti-chi-bot/pd that referenced this pull request Sep 1, 2023
@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Member

In response to a cherrypick label: new pull request created to branch release-7.1: #7028.

ti-chi-bot pushed a commit to ti-chi-bot/pd that referenced this pull request Sep 1, 2023
@bufferflies bufferflies deleted the scatter_bug branch September 4, 2023 04:36
ti-chi-bot bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 11, 2023
close #6962

In past, PD conside peer distribution in the different group influenece by using `TotalCountByStore` , but not include the leader distribution. The max used situation is partition table. 
After this pr, TIDB call scatter api will use same group not different. 

ref:
#3422
pingcap/tidb#46156

Signed-off-by: ti-chi-bot <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: bufferflies <[email protected]>

Co-authored-by: buffer <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: bufferflies <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: ti-chi-bot[bot] <108142056+ti-chi-bot[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
for _, store := range stores {
storeCount := context.selectedPeer.TotalCountByStore(store.GetID())
storeCount := context.selectedPeer.Get(store.GetID(), group)
if store.GetID() == peer.GetId() {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

if store.GetID() == peer.GetStoreId() {

ti-chi-bot bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 28, 2023
close #6962

In past, PD conside peer distribution in the different group influenece by using `TotalCountByStore` , but not include the leader distribution. The max used situation is partition table. 
After this pr, TIDB call scatter api will use same group not different. 

ref:
#3422
pingcap/tidb#46156

Signed-off-by: ti-chi-bot <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: bufferflies <[email protected]>

Co-authored-by: buffer <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: bufferflies <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: ti-chi-bot[bot] <108142056+ti-chi-bot[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
ti-chi-bot bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 22, 2023
close #6962

In past, PD conside peer distribution in the different group influenece by using `TotalCountByStore` , but not include the leader distribution. The max used situation is partition table. 
After this pr, TIDB call scatter api will use same group not different. 

ref:
#3422
pingcap/tidb#46156

Signed-off-by: ti-chi-bot <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: bufferflies <[email protected]>

Co-authored-by: buffer <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: bufferflies <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: ti-chi-bot[bot] <108142056+ti-chi-bot[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
rleungx pushed a commit to rleungx/pd that referenced this pull request Dec 4, 2023
close tikv#6962

In past, PD conside peer distribution in the different group influenece by using `TotalCountByStore` , but not include the leader distribution. The max used situation is partition table.
After this pr, TIDB call scatter api will use same group not different.

ref:
tikv#3422
pingcap/tidb#46156

Signed-off-by: bufferflies <[email protected]>

Co-authored-by: ti-chi-bot[bot] <108142056+ti-chi-bot[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
needs-cherry-pick-release-6.1 Should cherry pick this PR to release-6.1 branch. needs-cherry-pick-release-6.5 Should cherry pick this PR to release-6.5 branch. needs-cherry-pick-release-7.1 Should cherry pick this PR to release-7.1 branch. release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 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.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Scatter peer should consider the group
5 participants