On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Itamar Heim <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 04/04/2014 04:30 AM, Liran Zelkha wrote: > >> >> >> >> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 8:40 PM, Gilad Chaplik <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> > From: "Liran Zelkha" <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> >> > To: "Gilad Chaplik" <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> >> > Cc: "Omer Frenkel" <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>>, "Eli Mesika" <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>>, "engine-devel" <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>>, >> > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> > Sent: Thursday, April 3, 2014 7:51:39 PM >> > Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] vds_dynamic refactor >> > >> > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 5:33 PM, Gilad Chaplik >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> > >> > > *From: *"Liran Zelkha" <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> >> >> > > *To: *"Gilad Chaplik" <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> >> >> > > *Cc: *"Omer Frenkel" <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>>, "Eli Mesika" < >> > > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>, "engine-devel" >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >> >> > > *Sent: *Thursday, April 3, 2014 5:27:56 PM >> > > *Subject: *Re: [Engine-devel] vds_dynamic refactor >> > > >> > > True but that's no reason to have a bad schema >> > > >> > > I'm open to new ideas and truly want to understand what is bad? >> > > >> > The problem is with both updates and selects. >> > For selects - to get all the information for the VDS we have >> multiple >> > joins. Adding another one will hurt performance even more. >> >> What about creating the VDS list in the db. i.e. your patch [1] >> about constructing VDS objects in the engine, should occur in the db >> within a SP, and should be transparent to the server. that will >> solve the multiple table join. >> >> >> The joins are happening on the server. We have a VDS view that brings in >> information from many tables and we retrieve rows from it all the time. >> Just run an explain on a select * from vds and see for yourself. >> > > thought the distinction was vds_static is updated by user (configuration), > where as vds_dyanmic/statistics is reported from vdsm (slow/fast updates). > > True - vds_static hardly change. But vds_dynamic is split-brain - it has practically static data, but also has the status - which changes rapidly. And since we have 3 tables, we need to do 3 joins to get VDS (actually we do much more). > please remember joining them to one table, also means DWH will ETA all of > data each time. today it will only copy statistics if dynamic did not > change. > > I'm not saying joining all 3 tables to 1 table, just make them 2 tables. And since the data is hardly changing - same logic of DWH will stay.
_______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
