Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Received: from cust-asf.ponee.io (cust-asf.ponee.io [163.172.22.183]) by cust-asf2.ponee.io (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21763200BA8 for ; Mon, 24 Oct 2016 19:16:58 +0200 (CEST) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id 200BD160AEB; Mon, 24 Oct 2016 17:16:58 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id 16DEF160AD7 for ; Mon, 24 Oct 2016 19:16:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 95779 invoked by uid 500); 24 Oct 2016 17:16:56 -0000 Mailing-List: contact user-help@helix.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: user@helix.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list user@helix.apache.org Received: (qmail 95765 invoked by uid 99); 24 Oct 2016 17:16:56 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd3-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 24 Oct 2016 17:16:56 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd3-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd3-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 8773A180BD7 for ; Mon, 24 Oct 2016 17:16:55 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd3-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.171 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.171 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=2, KAM_LOTSOFHASH=0.25, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.999, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: spamd3-us-west.apache.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linkedin.com header.b=IiLvnzHQ; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linkedin.com header.b=eGoozevp Received: from mx1-lw-us.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd3-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.10]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cmT8sS8MOtPY for ; Mon, 24 Oct 2016 17:16:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail521.linkedin.com (mail521.linkedin.com [108.174.6.121]) by mx1-lw-us.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-us.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 618C65FBDC for ; Mon, 24 Oct 2016 17:16:53 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linkedin.com; s=proddkim1024; t=1477329407; bh=SuyEXPsMHZuPWrdKLI5D0wXjNSlgETfTiEU9HK+PvHM=; h=MIME-Version:From:Date:Subject:To:Content-Type; b=IiLvnzHQneBmjna8vS4fFs5o65prSythpmeMI+3Mlao+ax8Ecakl0D6BSrtmiLc8v uOT8ovWghVXSTNega6vU1yfdZ8WJU4PufAisb5N9fM/HyPzZC2g8nmCoBIHgCKwkUQ gp6bewO9+RYlGVR5RvpJYSXhfBpzhOnv/QgOo2Nc= Authentication-Results: mail521.prod.linkedin.com x-tls.subject="/C=US/ST=California/L=Mountain View/O=Google Inc/CN=smtp.gmail.com"; auth=pass (cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256) Authentication-Results: mail521.prod.linkedin.com; iprev=pass policy.iprev="2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::248"; spf=softfail smtp.mailfrom="lxia@linkedin.com" smtp.helo="mail-qt0-x248.google.com"; dkim=pass header.d=linkedin.com; tls=pass (verified) key.ciphersuite="TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256" key.length="128" tls.v="tlsv1.2" cert.client="C=US,ST=California,L=Mountain View,O=Google Inc,CN=smtp.gmail.com" cert.clientissuer="C=US,O=Google Inc,CN=Google Internet Authority G2" Received: from [2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::248] ([2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::248.40823] helo=mail-qt0-x248.google.com) by mail521.prod.linkedin.com (envelope-from ) (ecelerity 3.6.21.53563 r(Core:3.6.21.0)) with ESMTPS (cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 subject="/C=US/ST=California/L=Mountain View/O=Google Inc/CN=smtp.gmail.com") id AB/E4-27465-FF14E085; Mon, 24 Oct 2016 17:16:47 +0000 Received: by mail-qt0-x248.google.com with SMTP id g49so187300526qtc.7 for ; Mon, 24 Oct 2016 10:16:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linkedin.com; s=google; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=SuyEXPsMHZuPWrdKLI5D0wXjNSlgETfTiEU9HK+PvHM=; b=eGoozevppQ5FGcqh/MYytHRPE4SG0jiPVj/+6+06Gc5EATwB0fDjoQS5WoZC4woJXt aoKOiSrdQ79IQ51XAqzjaKeLhrup54l1//uICPG2HKo2XHELQD8m6aFaVpA9VF1FxKxE uy9XT3y3cJzWzzYDLWVJKoAJZ/HOiV6/JUqYc= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=SuyEXPsMHZuPWrdKLI5D0wXjNSlgETfTiEU9HK+PvHM=; b=M/+7wQdg2ppqyYn0YO8gV69TvfPxL7BQKNDR/18oTcyGI6ijZNwQhLOccuSNJxkR+j onp/Ay1aCVviJIFiw+ou4SEbg8I76WqBJnFin5p9nR4tBzG3hHK+fpZfPpx7s4cwjS0f wK71fKjx8SuscH5mH9wYCqXrNEe71nP+XJJ7sOAbn8NthXscYq5qM0pnii+qKl+sy61o gUJSYZnupuS5DQCC6IPf5cTpNCuEV/JNudziLR6V3h9vWB/YYZbg2McWjN+bFvyIxXkJ HSzHbjrwznZ6syAEwln8mqtuY9gdBRyg11h73gdFZpHahGKAtGE99od7SA6NCGDb49i5 8uLw== X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvegksEviuJQdeaPfi+JhMJyLfYQd+77+htcaYbzG6WvCW+TZ5xRcUn6Va1D0Vo6pBy+u4ZCiVosMkrbEf7RJcnsnOGjLPKXI0VuFQAvwsteudZdHPrewHDbI22wO9Ud2GbXzgSLj0SGj0CydTR+1GAHgSGT2rczBA== X-Received: by 10.107.170.103 with SMTP id t100mr14592437ioe.87.1477329406553; Mon, 24 Oct 2016 10:16:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.107.170.103 with SMTP id t100mr14592425ioe.87.1477329406280; Mon, 24 Oct 2016 10:16:46 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.107.32.21 with HTTP; Mon, 24 Oct 2016 10:16:05 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Lei Xia Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2016 10:16:05 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Too-aggressive FULL_AUTO rebalancing? (maybe fixed @ master) To: user@helix.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1142dbbc7a7ba4053f9f8e95 archived-at: Mon, 24 Oct 2016 17:16:58 -0000 --001a1142dbbc7a7ba4053f9f8e95 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Okey, let me port the fix into 0.6.x. Thanks Lei On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 10:12 AM, kishore g wrote: > Thanks. Lei, can we apply this to 0.6.x branch before cutting the release= . > > On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 10:01 AM, Michael Craig wrote: > >> Found it: https://github.com/apache/helix/commit/dc9f129b67f8cacdf >> 0cd22288f166b56fc5654a0 >> >> This commit was not ported to the 0.6.x line. Here is the original JIRA >> issue: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HELIX-543 >> >> On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 5:08 PM, Michael Craig wrote: >> >>> I'm not sure. The diff between 0.6.6 and master is enormous :( >>> https://github.com/apache/helix/compare/helix-0.6.6...master >>> >>> On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 4:30 PM, kishore g wrote: >>> >>>> Will take a look at it. Do you know what's the difference between >>>> master and 0.6.6 tag. We can pull that change into 0.6.6 >>>> >>>> On Oct 21, 2016 4:10 PM, "Michael Craig" wrote: >>>> >>>>> Ok. I tried the helix-0.6.6 tag from GH and found the issue is still >>>>> present: >>>>> >>>>> https://gist.github.com/mkscrg/628ab964995c0be914d44654d26ae >>>>> 561/5af298a63c6796d4f087bc345179ae1fd5aabc33 >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 3:22 PM, kishore g >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Yes it should be fixed in 0.6.6. Lei is working on the release. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Oct 21, 2016 1:52 PM, "Michael Craig" wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> (This came up in a prior thread=E2=80=94moving it out to clarify it= from >>>>>>> that other question.) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> With helix-0.6.5, FULL_AUTO rebalancing seems too aggressive when >>>>>>> nodes reconnect to the cluster. For example, with 2 nodes + 1 resou= rce (1 >>>>>>> replica, 1 partition) + OnlineOffline: https://gist.gi >>>>>>> thub.com/mkscrg/628ab964995c0be914d44654d26ae561/99348c870e9 >>>>>>> f028048c1d1cfdd15976325f293f9 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> However, this seems to be fixed at the current master branch on >>>>>>> GitHub: https://gist.github.com/mkscrg/628ab964995c0be914d44 >>>>>>> 654d26ae561/ec26a64a74b50c8c125ccd1f9bde1d8aa848a0b5 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Will this fix be released in an 0.6.x version? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> >> > --=20 *Lei Xia *Senior Software Engineer Data Infra/Nuage & Helix LinkedIn lxia@linkedin.com www.linkedin.com/in/lxia1 --001a1142dbbc7a7ba4053f9f8e95 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
=C2=A0 Okey, let me port the fix into 0.6.x.=C2= =A0=C2=A0


Thanks
Lei

On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 10:12 AM, k= ishore g <g.kishore@gmail.com> wrote:
Thanks. Lei, can we apply this to 0.6.x bran= ch before cutting the release.

On Mon, Oct 24, = 2016 at 10:01 AM, Michael Craig <mcraig@box.com> wrote:
Found it:=C2=A0https://github.com/apache/helix/commit/dc9f129b67f8= cacdf0cd22288f166b56fc5654a0

This commit was no= t ported to the 0.6.x line. Here is the original JIRA issue:=C2=A0http= s://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HELIX-543

On Fri, Oct 21, 2016= at 5:08 PM, Michael Craig <mcraig@box.com> wrote:
I'm not sure. The diff between 0= .6.6 and master is enormous :( https://github.com/apache/he= lix/compare/helix-0.6.6...master

On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 4:30 PM, kishore g <g.kishore@gmail.com> wrote:

Will t= ake a look at it. Do you know what's the difference between master and = 0.6.6 tag. We can pull that change into 0.6.6


On Oct 21, 2016 4= :10 PM, "Michael Craig" <mcraig@box.com> wrote:
Ok. I tried the helix-0.6.6 tag f= rom GH and found the issue is still present:=C2=A0


On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 3:22 PM, kishore g <g.kis= hore@gmail.com> wrote:

Yes it should be fixed in 0.6.6. Lei is working on the release.<= /p>


On Oct 21, 2016 1= :52 PM, "Michael Craig" <mcraig@box.com> wrote:
(This came up in a prior thr= ead=E2=80=94moving it out to clarify it from that other question.)

With helix-0.6.5, FULL_AUTO rebalancing seems too aggressive wh= en nodes reconnect to the cluster. For example, with 2 nodes + 1 resource (= 1 replica, 1 partition) + OnlineOffline:=C2=A0https://gist.github.com/mkscrg/628ab964= 995c0be914d44654d26ae561/99348c870e9f028048c1d1cfdd15976325f293f9=

However, this seems to be fixed at the current mast= er branch on GitHub:=C2=A0https://gist.github.com/mkscrg/628ab964995c0be914d446= 54d26ae561/ec26a64a74b50c8c125ccd1f9bde1d8aa848a0b5

=
Will this fix be released in an 0.6.x version?







--
Lei Xia
Senior Software Engineer
Data Infra/Nuage & Helix
LinkedIn

lxia@linkedin.com
www.linkedin.com/in/lxia1
--001a1142dbbc7a7ba4053f9f8e95--