Hi Sammi, > ... using a distributed sequence ID as the object ID and update ID, ...
It will add more overhead to the system. Why would it gain? Tsz-Wo On Tue, Jan 9, 2024 at 9:23 PM Sammi Chen <sammic...@apache.org> wrote: > Tsz-Wo, > > If ratis can support starting from a specified term and index, could it be > easy for users to find out which term and index should they use and how to > configure them? > I'm thinking of a general approach, using a distributed sequence ID as the > object ID and update ID, so these two IDs will be decoupled with the ratis > tx ID. What do you think? > > Bests, > Sammi > > On Wed, 10 Jan 2024 at 04:14, Tsz Wo Sze <szets...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > ... If for any reason, the ratis need to be reset and transaction ID > > will start from 0 again, then it will cause updateID compare issue and > > duplicate object ID issue after that. ... > > > > We could add a new feature to Ratis in order to let the state machine > pass > > the starting log index. It seems a generally useful feature. > > > > Tsz-Wo > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 5, 2024 at 2:52 AM Sammi Chen <sammic...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > Attenders: Guohao, Yiyang, Jianghua, Hualong, Yuanben, Hongbin, > Kangchen, > > > Ce, ..., Sammi > > > > > > 1. > > > > > > Shopee > > > 1. 1.4.0 RC0 VOTE is ongoing. Welcome the community contributors to > > > evaluate the RC0 package and vote in the thread. > > > 2. > > > > > > DiDi > > > 1. Doing OM HA performance evaluation. Plan to migrate OM from non > HA > > to > > > HA if performance meets the requirement. > > > 2. Face the same objectID issue after previously converting from > OM > > > HA to non HA. The current objectID and updateID are strictly > > related > > > with > > > ratis transaction ID. If for any reason, the ratis need to be > reset > > > and > > > transaction ID will start from 0 again, then it will cause > > > updateID compare > > > issue and duplicate object ID issue after that. One case could > be, > > > use a > > > backed OM rocksdb directory to start new OM instances for a new > OM > > > namespace. A ratis independent incrementally increased ID is one > > > solution. > > > 3. Suggest to provide an ozone command to manually update tx ID > in > > OM > > > rocksdb in case the tx ID is not updated due to any potential > bugs > > > in OM. > > > 4. Need review help on > > > HDDS-9988. SCM UI shows storage usage percentage #5882 > > > <https://github.com/apache/ozone/pull/5882> > > > > > > - > > > > > > 3. Qihoo > > > > > > 1. Find one bug in GrpcOmTransport, that GrpcOmTransport doesn't > > handle > > > the exception well once OM leader switches. > > > 2. Working on an OM block batch allocation proposal to reduce the > > > request from OM to SCM. With this approach, the SCM block allocation > > > request can be reduced by 90%. > > > 3. Benchmarked SCM block allocation QPS with a 36 Core server, it's > > > about 20K QPS. Would like to know if there is any way to improve the > > QPS > > > from 20K. > > > > > > - > > > > > > 4. China Unicom > > > > > > 1. Start to use ozone. > > > 2. Find one issue when using 1.3.0 hadoop3 ozone client with Spark > 3. > > > 3. Hadoop 2.7 currently works with Ozone. But Hadoop 2.7 support was > > > dropped sometime before. So the compatibility cannot be fully > > > guaranteed in > > > later Ozone versions. > > > 4. Can use distcp to migrate data from hadoop 2.7 to Ozone cluster > > now. > > > > > >
