[go: nahoru, domu]

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

[improve][broker] System topic writer/reader connection not counted. #18369

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Nov 23, 2022

Conversation

Technoboy-
Copy link
Contributor

Master Issue: #18364

Motivation

It's better not to count the system topic writer/reader connection.

Documentation

  • doc
  • doc-required
  • doc-not-needed
  • doc-complete

@Technoboy- Technoboy- added type/enhancement The enhancements for the existing features or docs. e.g. reduce memory usage of the delayed messages area/broker ready-to-test labels Nov 7, 2022
@github-actions github-actions bot added the doc-not-needed Your PR changes do not impact docs label Nov 7, 2022
@Technoboy- Technoboy- self-assigned this Nov 7, 2022
@Technoboy- Technoboy- added this to the 2.12.0 milestone Nov 7, 2022
@codecov-commenter
Copy link
codecov-commenter commented Nov 7, 2022

Codecov Report

Merging #18369 (53710c1) into master (27186a1) will increase coverage by 1.71%.
The diff coverage is 63.63%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##             master   #18369      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     45.61%   47.33%   +1.71%     
+ Complexity    10728    10479     -249     
============================================
  Files           752      698      -54     
  Lines         72521    68070    -4451     
  Branches       7791     7279     -512     
============================================
- Hits          33083    32221     -862     
+ Misses        35769    32263    -3506     
+ Partials       3669     3586      -83     
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 47.33% <63.63%> (+1.71%) ⬆️

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

Impacted Files Coverage Δ
...sar/broker/service/persistent/PersistentTopic.java 62.04% <ø> (-0.10%) ⬇️
...rg/apache/pulsar/broker/service/AbstractTopic.java 65.26% <63.63%> (+0.55%) ⬆️
...java/org/apache/pulsar/proxy/stats/TopicStats.java 58.82% <0.00%> (-41.18%) ⬇️
.../apache/pulsar/broker/loadbalance/LoadManager.java 61.11% <0.00%> (-16.67%) ⬇️
...tent/NonPersistentDispatcherMultipleConsumers.java 40.74% <0.00%> (-12.35%) ⬇️
...apache/pulsar/broker/service/TopicListService.java 42.62% <0.00%> (-12.30%) ⬇️
.../org/apache/bookkeeper/mledger/impl/EntryImpl.java 69.62% <0.00%> (-11.27%) ⬇️
...keeper/mledger/impl/cache/RangeEntryCacheImpl.java 45.79% <0.00%> (-6.31%) ⬇️
...pulsar/broker/service/PulsarCommandSenderImpl.java 72.30% <0.00%> (-5.71%) ⬇️
...g/apache/pulsar/client/impl/ConnectionHandler.java 50.00% <0.00%> (-5.32%) ⬇️
... and 135 more

@grssam
Copy link
Contributor
grssam commented Nov 7, 2022

@Technoboy- Thank you for the PR.
It's weird that such a generic issue, and we never faced it in our production system till now.. Is this a regression in 2.9.3? We were previously on 2.7.4 up until september. I tried to look at differences in 2.7 vs 2.9 wrt this particular context and could not see any sort of regression; Does it mean that the problem existed in 2.7.* as well?

@Technoboy-
Copy link
Contributor Author

@Technoboy- Thank you for the PR. It's weird that such a generic issue, and we never faced it in our production system till now.. Is this a regression in 2.9.3? We were previously on 2.7.4 up until september. I tried to look at differences in 2.7 vs 2.9 wrt this particular context and could not see any sort of regression; Does it mean that the problem existed in 2.7.* as well?

yes, it existed in branch-2.7.

@grssam
Copy link
Contributor
grssam commented Nov 8, 2022

@Technoboy- Thank you for the PR. It's weird that such a generic issue, and we never faced it in our production system till now.. Is this a regression in 2.9.3? We were previously on 2.7.4 up until september. I tried to look at differences in 2.7 vs 2.9 wrt this particular context and could not see any sort of regression; Does it mean that the problem existed in 2.7.* as well?

yes, it existed in branch-2.7.

Thanks. It's weird that no one ever faced this issue before.. even we have been running for over an year without facing this issue..

@Technoboy- Technoboy- closed this Nov 17, 2022
@Technoboy- Technoboy- reopened this Nov 17, 2022
Copy link
Contributor
@codelipenghui codelipenghui left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Do we need to change method isConsumersExceededOnTopic? We have max subscriptions and max consumers limitation for a topic.

Copy link
Member
@mattisonchao mattisonchao left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Please apply @codelipenghui's comments.

@Technoboy-
Copy link
Contributor Author

Do we need to change method isConsumersExceededOnTopic? We have max subscriptions and max consumers limitation for a topic.

yes, already fixed. please help review, thanks.

@grssam
Copy link
Contributor
grssam commented Nov 25, 2022

Please cherry-pick this and #18603 to 2.9 branch as well.

codelipenghui pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 28, 2022
…18603)

This PR is a supplement to #18369.
- `AbstractTopic.isSameAddressProducersExceeded()`
- `AbstractBaseDispatcher.isConsumersExceededOnSubscription()`
labuladong pushed a commit to labuladong/pulsar that referenced this pull request Nov 28, 2022
…pache#18603)

This PR is a supplement to apache#18369.
- `AbstractTopic.isSameAddressProducersExceeded()`
- `AbstractBaseDispatcher.isConsumersExceededOnSubscription()`
congbobo184 pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 6, 2022
congbobo184 pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 6, 2022
…18603)

This PR is a supplement to #18369.
- `AbstractTopic.isSameAddressProducersExceeded()`
- `AbstractBaseDispatcher.isConsumersExceededOnSubscription()`

(cherry picked from commit a2fb562)
@congbobo184 congbobo184 added the cherry-picked/branch-2.9 Archived: 2.9 is end of life label Dec 7, 2022
Technoboy- pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 8, 2022
…18603)

This PR is a supplement to #18369.
- `AbstractTopic.isSameAddressProducersExceeded()`
- `AbstractBaseDispatcher.isConsumersExceededOnSubscription()`
Technoboy- pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 8, 2022
…18603)

This PR is a supplement to #18369.
- `AbstractTopic.isSameAddressProducersExceeded()`
- `AbstractBaseDispatcher.isConsumersExceededOnSubscription()`
lifepuzzlefun pushed a commit to lifepuzzlefun/pulsar that referenced this pull request Dec 9, 2022
…pache#18603)

This PR is a supplement to apache#18369.
- `AbstractTopic.isSameAddressProducersExceeded()`
- `AbstractBaseDispatcher.isConsumersExceededOnSubscription()`
nicoloboschi pushed a commit to datastax/pulsar that referenced this pull request Jan 10, 2023
nicoloboschi pushed a commit to datastax/pulsar that referenced this pull request Jan 10, 2023
…pache#18603)

This PR is a supplement to apache#18369.
- `AbstractTopic.isSameAddressProducersExceeded()`
- `AbstractBaseDispatcher.isConsumersExceededOnSubscription()`

(cherry picked from commit b33bff9)
lifepuzzlefun pushed a commit to lifepuzzlefun/pulsar that referenced this pull request Jan 10, 2023
…pache#18603)

This PR is a supplement to apache#18369.
- `AbstractTopic.isSameAddressProducersExceeded()`
- `AbstractBaseDispatcher.isConsumersExceededOnSubscription()`
nicoloboschi pushed a commit to datastax/pulsar that referenced this pull request Jan 11, 2023
nicoloboschi pushed a commit to datastax/pulsar that referenced this pull request Jan 11, 2023
…pache#18603)

This PR is a supplement to apache#18369.
- `AbstractTopic.isSameAddressProducersExceeded()`
- `AbstractBaseDispatcher.isConsumersExceededOnSubscription()`

(cherry picked from commit b33bff9)
@Technoboy- Technoboy- deleted the producer-consumer-exceed branch September 14, 2023 11:34
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area/broker cherry-picked/branch-2.9 Archived: 2.9 is end of life cherry-picked/branch-2.10 cherry-picked/branch-2.11 doc-not-needed Your PR changes do not impact docs ready-to-test release/2.9.4 release/2.10.3 release/2.11.0 type/enhancement The enhancements for the existing features or docs. e.g. reduce memory usage of the delayed messages
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants