The pull has been merged and cherry-picked to branch-4.15 Thanks, Nicolò Boschi
Il giorno gio 13 ott 2022 alle ore 12:58 Shiji Lu <lush...@apache.org> ha scritto: > I think we can start a new discussion about the modification. The > modification method can be done better. > we automatically calculate the blockCacheSize through the configuration > started by bin/bookkeeper, and then update > conf/entry_location_rocksdb.conf, or I also mention a pr to make a scheme > comparison ? Or make this function a switch to choose the implementation > > > On 2022/10/09 15:03:01 Hang Chen wrote: > > I found the PR https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3056 has > > changed the rocksDB default cache size from 10% of direct memory to > > 206150041(196MB), which will lead to entry read performance decrease > > when there are huge number of entries stored in the ledger directory. > > It will have a huge impact on the read performance when the BookKeeper > > cluster upgrades from 4.14.x to 4.15.x. > > > > The motivation of PR 3056 is to change RocksDB configuration to a > > single configuration file, and it introduces the following drawbacks. > > 1. Most users, especially those unfamiliar with RocksDB, will be > > confused about tuning RocksDB performance due to lack of guidance on > > some important key parameters. > > 2. The RocksDB blockCacheSize configuration can only be set to a fixed > > value, not a percentage of direct memory. > > > > In order to simplify the RocksDB configuration and make it easy to > > tune the performance of the RocksDB, I prefer to separate the RocksDB > > configuration into two parts. > > 1. The most important configurations, which is usually changed to tune > > RocksDB performance, will be located in conf/bk_server.conf > > 2. Other advanced configuration will be in a separate RocksDB > configuration file > > > > For the default RocksDB blockCacheSize change, Do you need to trigger > > a new release to change it back? Current Pulsar master branch uses > > BookKeeper 4.14.x, and we can change the default value back to 10% of > > direct memory to avoid the entry read performance degradation caused > > by upgrading Pulsar's BookKeeper dependency to 4.15.x. > > > > Do you guys have any suggestions? > > > > Thanks, > > Hang > > >
