Re: [DISCUSS] BP-14 Relax Durability

Thanks Sijie I will do my best. I can try to separate: 1) protocol changes (protobuf) 2) new client side API 3) LAC protocol changes bookie side changes 4) additional tests Actually I already have a private work-in-progress branch with the full stack, I will finish to implement the document and t

Re: [DISCUSS] BP-14 Relax Durability

Cool. I would expect this is a big change. It would be good if you can divide it into smaller tasks, so people can review them easier. - Sijie On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 1:05 AM, Enrico Olivelli wrote: > Thank you all ! > > I will copy the content of the Final draft to the Wiki and mark the > doc

Re: [DISCUSS] BP-14 Relax Durability

Thank you all ! I will copy the content of the Final draft to the Wiki and mark the document as "Accepted" I will send a PR soon but it will depend on BP-15 New CreateLeader API I hope we could make it for 4.6 Enrico 2017-09-11 18:58 GMT+02:00 Sijie Guo : > Enrico, > > Feel free to close th

Re: [DISCUSS] BP-14 Relax Durability

Enrico, Feel free to close the thread and mark this BP as accepted, if there is no -1. - Sijie On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 2:26 AM, Enrico Olivelli wrote: > Ping > > 2017-09-07 9:32 GMT+02:00 Enrico Olivelli : > > > Hi all, > > > > > > You can find the revised proposal here > > https://cwiki.apach

Re: [DISCUSS] BP-14 Relax Durability

Ping 2017-09-07 9:32 GMT+02:00 Enrico Olivelli : > Hi all, > > > You can find the revised proposal here > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/BOOKKEEPER/ > BP-14+Relax+durability > > The link to the document open for comments is this: > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yNi9t2_deOOMXDaG

Re: [DISCUSS] BP-14 Relax Durability

Hi all, You can find the revised proposal here https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/BOOKKEEPER/BP-14+Relax+durability The link to the document open for comments is this: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yNi9t2_deOOMXDaGzrnmaHTQeB3B3Fnym82DUERH7LM/edit?usp=sharing Please check it out W

Re: [DISCUSS] BP-14 Relax Durability

Thank you Sijie for summarizing and thanks to the community for helping in this important enhancement to BookKeeper I am convinced that as JV pointed out we need to declare at ledger creation time that the ledger is going to perform no-sync writes. I think we need an explicit declaration currentl

Re: [DISCUSS] BP-14 Relax Durability

Thank you, Enrico, JV. These are great discussions. After reading these two proposals, I have a few very high-level comments, dividing into three categories. *API* - I think there are not fundamentally differences between these two proposals. They are trying to achieve similar goals by exposin

Re: [DISCUSS] BP-14 Relax Durability

2017-08-29 8:01 GMT+02:00 Venkateswara Rao Jujjuri : > I don't believe I fully followed your second case. But even in this case, > your major concern is about the additional 'sync' RPC? > yes apart from that I am fine with your proposal too, that is to have a LedgerType which drives durability an

Re: [DISCUSS] BP-14 Relax Durability

I don't believe I fully followed your second case. But even in this case, your major concern is about the additional 'sync' RPC? or something else that the LedgerType proposal won't work? On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 7:35 AM, Enrico Olivelli wrote: > I think that having a set of options on the ledg

Re: [DISCUSS] BP-14 Relax Durability

I think that having a set of options on the ledger metadata will be a good enhancement and I am sure we will do it as soon as it will be needed, maybe we do not need it now. Actually I think we will need to declare this durability-level at entry level to support some uses cases in BP-14 document,

Re: [DISCUSS] BP-14 Relax Durability

On sab 26 ago 2017, 19:19 Venkateswara Rao Jujjuri wrote: > Hi all, > > As promised during Thursday call, here is my proposal. > > *NOTE*: Major difference in this proposal compared to Enrico’s > < > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JLYO3K3tZ5PJGmyS0YK_-NW8VOUUgUWVBmswCUOG158/edit#heading=h.q2

Re: [DISCUSS] BP-14 Relax Durability

Hi all, As promised during Thursday call, here is my proposal. *NOTE*: Major difference in this proposal compared to Enrico’s is making the durability a property of the ledger(type) as op

Re: [DISCUSS] BP-14 Relax Durability

Thank you all for the comments and for taking a look to the document so soon. I have updated the doc, we will discuss the document at the meeting, Enrico 2017-08-24 2:27 GMT+02:00 Sijie Guo : > Enrico, > > Thank you so much! It is a great effort for putting this up. Overall looks > good. I made

Re: [DISCUSS] BP-14 Relax Durability

Enrico, Thank you so much! It is a great effort for putting this up. Overall looks good. I made some comments, we can discuss at tomorrow's community meeting. - Sijie On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 8:25 AM, Enrico Olivelli wrote: > Hi all, > I have drafted a first proposal for BP-14 - Relax Durabilit

[DISCUSS] BP-14 Relax Durability

Hi all, I have drafted a first proposal for BP-14 - Relax Durability We are talking about limiting the number of fsync to the journal while preserving the correctness of the LAC protocol. This is the link to the wiki page, but as the issue is huge we prefer to use Google Documents for sharing com