cassandra-commits mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "sankalp kohli (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (CASSANDRA-6246) EPaxos
Date Wed, 12 Nov 2014 00:08:35 GMT


sankalp kohli commented on CASSANDRA-6246:

Regarding reviewing the patch. I have some cleanups/suggestions to the code. I am yet to see
the whole code. Also I won't note down the things which still need to be taken care of or
1) In the DependencyManger, we might want to keep the last executed instance otherwise we
won't know if the next one depends on the previous one or we have missed any in between. 
2) You might want to create java packages and move files there. For example in repair code, where we keep all the Request Responses. We can do the
same for verb handler, etc. 
3) We should add the new verbs to DatabaseDescriptor.getTimout(). Otherwise they will use
the default timeout. I fixed this for current paxos implementation in CASSANDRA-7752
4) PreacceptResponse.failure can also accept missingInstances in the constructor. You can
make it final and not volatile. 
5) ExecutionSorter.getOrder(). Here if condition uncommitted.size() == 0 is always true. Also
loadedScc is empty as we don't insert into it. 
6) In, Instance toExecute = state.loadInstance(toExecuteId); should be within
the try as we are holding a lock. 
7) EpaxosState.commitCallbacks could be a multi map. 
8) In, successors, noop and fastPathPossible are not used. We can also get rid
of Instance.applyRemote() method.
9) PreacceptCallback.ballot need not be an instance variable as we set completed=true after
we set it.  
10) PreacceptResponse.missingInstance is not required as it can be calculated on the leader
in the PreacceptCallback. 
11) EpaxosState.accept(). We can filter out the skipPlaceholderPredicate when we calculated
missingInstances in PreacceptCallback.getAcceptDecision()
12) PreacceptCallback.getAcceptDecision() We don't need to calculate missingIds if accept
is going to be false in AcceptDecision. 
13) ParticipantInfo.remoteEndpoints. Here we are not doing any isAlive check and just sending
messages to all remote endpoints. 
14) ParticipantInfo.endpoints will not be required once we remove the Epaxos.getSuccessors()
15) Accept is send to live local endpoints and to all remote endpoints. In AcceptCallback,
I think we should count response from only local endpoints 
16) When we execute the instance in ExecuteTask, what if we crash after executing the instance
but before recording it. 

> EPaxos
> ------
>                 Key: CASSANDRA-6246
>                 URL:
>             Project: Cassandra
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Core
>            Reporter: Jonathan Ellis
>            Assignee: Blake Eggleston
>            Priority: Minor
> One reason we haven't optimized our Paxos implementation with Multi-paxos is that Multi-paxos
requires leader election and hence, a period of unavailability when the leader dies.
> EPaxos is a Paxos variant that requires (1) less messages than multi-paxos, (2) is particularly
useful across multiple datacenters, and (3) allows any node to act as coordinator:
> However, there is substantial additional complexity involved if we choose to implement

This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA

View raw message