For the pr https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3523
In BookKeeper and Pulsar's conf folder, it already has default RocksDB
configuration files. In this Pr, the loading order is RocksDB
Configuration file > conf/bk_server.conf, which means it will still
load the RocksDB configuration file by
Thank you, Nicolò Boschi!
I have updated the website and release note to mention this.
https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3540
Yong
On Mon, 17 Oct 2022 at 16:08, Nicolò Boschi wrote:
> The pull has been merged and cherry-picked to branch-4.15
>
> Thanks,
> Nicolò Boschi
>
>
> Il giorno
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 ha
scritto:
> I think we can start a new discussion about the modification. The
> modification method can be done better.
> we automatically calculate the blockCach
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
Il giorno gio 13 ott 2022 alle ore 04:35 Yong Zhang
ha scritto:
>
> Hi,
>
> I have pushed a PR for fixing this issue.
> https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3523
>
> As we discussed, we ignore the configuration file if they are not exists.
> Then using the configurations in the bk server conf
Hi,
I have pushed a PR for fixing this issue.
https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3523
As we discussed, we ignore the configuration file if they are not exists.
Then using the configurations in the bk server configuration file.
The rocksDB related configuration file already include in our
I agree with Yong, we should back-support the existing configuration,
otherwise, the pulsar helm chart also need to be changed when upgrade
BookKeeper 4.14.x to 4.15.x
Thanks,
Hang
Enrico Olivelli 于2022年10月10日周一 16:07写道：
>
> Il Lun 10 Ott 2022, 07:44 Yong Zhang ha
> scritto:
>
> > We shouldn't
Il Lun 10 Ott 2022, 07:44 Yong Zhang ha
scritto:
> We shouldn't remove any existing configuration or feature in a so short
> time. I think at least we need to back-support the existing configuration.
> If we must do the break, we should make the existing things in a
> deprecation
> state for a wh
We shouldn't remove any existing configuration or feature in a so short
time. I think at least we need to back-support the existing configuration.
If we must do the break, we should make the existing things in a deprecation
state for a while.
Breaking existing configurations would make a huge impa
Il Dom 9 Ott 2022, 17:03 Hang Chen ha scritto:
> 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 s
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
11 matches
Mail list logo
