You mean multiple URIs in a segment's download url. No for this project.

On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 2:59 PM kishore g <[email protected]> wrote:

> +1 peer.
>
> unrelated to this - do we support multiple URI's?
>
> On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 2:51 PM Subbu Subramaniam <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > Hey Ting,
> >
> > I like the URI in metadata as "peer:///segmentName". This way, the URI
> > remains parsable and we can use the scheme to check for a segment
> fetcher,
> >
> > thanks
> >
> > -Subbu
> >
> > On 2020/06/10 01:09:25, TING CHEN <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > As part of the deep store by-passing
> > > <
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/PINOT/By-passing+deep-store+requirement+for+Realtime+segment+completion
> > >
> > > project, a server is allowed to download segments from peer Pinot
> servers
> > > during Low Level Consumer (LLC) instead of deep segment stores. To
> enable
> > > this feature, we plan to add a new URI format for the field
> > > *segment.realtime.download.url
> > > *in LLCRealtimeSegmentZKMetadata.
> > >
> > > The new URI format serves the purpose of instructing a Pinot server to
> > find
> > > and download the segment from a peer server. Controller writes it to
> > Helix
> > > in case of segment upload failure or no deep store configured at all.
> We
> > > proposed the following format options and want to hear your feedback:
> > >
> > >    1. peer:///segmentName; (my preference)
> > >    2. simply an empty string *''*
> > >
> > > Both are in essence specially markers to indicate that the segment is
> not
> > > found in deep store and servers have to download them from peer
> servers.
> > > (1) has the benefit of better readability than (2) for debugging
> > purposes.
> > >
> > > Please let me know what you think.
> > >
> > > Ting Chen
> > >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to