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

forward port workarround for queue populator batch getting stuck #2544

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: development/8.7
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

Kerkesni
Copy link
Contributor

@Kerkesni Kerkesni commented Sep 24, 2024

7.x fix was not forward ported to avoid introducing memory leaks into the code. Instead of just unblocking the next batch processing call and leaving the stuck one alive, now we shutdown the whole process.

7.x fix commit: dfcc2f5

Issue: BB-526

@bert-e
Copy link
Contributor

bert-e commented Sep 24, 2024

Hello kerkesni,

My role is to assist you with the merge of this
pull request. Please type @bert-e help to get information
on this process, or consult the user documentation.

Available options
name description privileged authored
/after_pull_request Wait for the given pull request id to be merged before continuing with the current one.
/bypass_author_approval Bypass the pull request author's approval
/bypass_build_status Bypass the build and test status
/bypass_commit_size Bypass the check on the size of the changeset TBA
/bypass_incompatible_branch Bypass the check on the source branch prefix
/bypass_jira_check Bypass the Jira issue check
/bypass_peer_approval Bypass the pull request peers' approval
/bypass_leader_approval Bypass the pull request leaders' approval
/approve Instruct Bert-E that the author has approved the pull request. ✍️
/create_pull_requests Allow the creation of integration pull requests.
/create_integration_branches Allow the creation of integration branches.
/no_octopus Prevent Wall-E from doing any octopus merge and use multiple consecutive merge instead
/unanimity Change review acceptance criteria from one reviewer at least to all reviewers
/wait Instruct Bert-E not to run until further notice.
Available commands
name description privileged
/help Print Bert-E's manual in the pull request.
/status Print Bert-E's current status in the pull request TBA
/clear Remove all comments from Bert-E from the history TBA
/retry Re-start a fresh build TBA
/build Re-start a fresh build TBA
/force_reset Delete integration branches & pull requests, and restart merge process from the beginning.
/reset Try to remove integration branches unless there are commits on them which do not appear on the source branch.

Status report is not available.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Sep 24, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 69.50%. Comparing base (b8bd575) to head (3779062).
Report is 6 commits behind head on development/8.7.

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
lib/constants.js 100.00% <ø> (ø)
lib/queuePopulator/LogReader.js 40.80% <100.00%> (+2.02%) ⬆️
lib/queuePopulator/QueuePopulator.js 32.87% <100.00%> (+0.61%) ⬆️

... and 2 files with indirect coverage changes

Components Coverage Δ
Bucket Notification 66.66% <ø> (ø)
Core Library 74.17% <100.00%> (-0.16%) ⬇️
Ingestion 69.24% <ø> (ø)
Lifecycle 75.07% <ø> (ø)
Oplog Populator 82.95% <ø> (ø)
Replication 57.42% <ø> (ø)
Bucket Scanner 85.76% <ø> (ø)
@@                 Coverage Diff                 @@
##           development/8.7    #2544      +/-   ##
===================================================
- Coverage            69.56%   69.50%   -0.06%     
===================================================
  Files                  194      194              
  Lines                12792    12803      +11     
===================================================
  Hits                  8899     8899              
- Misses                3883     3894      +11     
  Partials                10       10              
Flag Coverage Δ
api:retry 9.65% <0.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
api:routes 9.54% <0.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
bucket-scanner 85.76% <ø> (ø)
ingestion 12.53% <36.36%> (+0.02%) ⬆️
lib 7.53% <0.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
lifecycle 19.41% <0.00%> (-0.02%) ⬇️
notification 0.88% <0.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
replication 18.94% <0.00%> (-0.11%) ⬇️
unit 43.53% <100.00%> (+0.20%) ⬆️

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

@Kerkesni Kerkesni force-pushed the improvement/BB-526 branch 2 times, most recently from f605ea3 to 85f130b Compare September 26, 2024 10:19
@scality scality deleted a comment from bert-e Sep 26, 2024
@bert-e
Copy link
Contributor

bert-e commented Sep 26, 2024

Request integration branches

Waiting for integration branch creation to be requested by the user.

To request integration branches, please comment on this pull request with the following command:

/create_integration_branches

Alternatively, the /approve and /create_pull_requests commands will automatically
create the integration branches.

@Kerkesni Kerkesni changed the base branch from development/8.6 to development/8.7 October 10, 2024 14:44
@bert-e
Copy link
Contributor

bert-e commented Oct 10, 2024

Incorrect fix version

The Fix Version/s in issue BB-526 contains:

  • 8.6.50

  • 8.7.0

Considering where you are trying to merge, I ignored possible hotfix versions and I expected to find:

  • 8.7.0

Please check the Fix Version/s of BB-526, or the target
branch of this pull request.

@Kerkesni Kerkesni marked this pull request as ready for review October 10, 2024 14:46
@bert-e
Copy link
Contributor

bert-e commented Oct 10, 2024

Waiting for approval

The following approvals are needed before I can proceed with the merge:

  • the author

  • 2 peers

this.log.error('queue populator batch timeout', {
logStats: batchState.logStats,
});
process.emit('SIGTERM');
Copy link
Contributor

@francoisferrand francoisferrand Oct 11, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

should we really "crash" ?
could we not just fail healthcheck? (may not be supported at the moment in s3c, but will need to anyway...)

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

As far as i know, S3C (precisely supervisord) doesn't support restarting a process on healthcheck failure.
I added logic for failing the healthcheck, but i'm still keeping the crashing behaviour.

@Kerkesni Kerkesni force-pushed the improvement/BB-526 branch 2 times, most recently from f5fcc9b to fa9f680 Compare October 14, 2024 13:27
7.x fix was not forward ported to avoid introducing memory leaks
into the code. Instead of just unblocking the next batch processing
call and leaving the stuck one alive, now we shutdown the whole process.

7.x fix commit: dfcc2f5

Issue: BB-526
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants