[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KUDU-3180?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17172925#comment-17172925
]
YifanZhang commented on KUDU-3180:
----------------------------------
Thanks [~aserbin].
I agree that using {{memory_size * time_since_last_flush}} instead of just
{{time_since_last_flush}} to pick which MRS should be flush is a easy way to
improve current policy. Also if we prefer flush to compactions, current policy
ensures that if an MRS over {{flush_threshold_mb}}, a flush will be more
likely to be selected than a compaction.
> kudu don't always prefer to flush MRS/DMS that anchor more memory
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: KUDU-3180
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KUDU-3180
> Project: Kudu
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: YifanZhang
> Priority: Major
> Attachments: image-2020-08-04-20-26-53-749.png,
> image-2020-08-04-20-28-00-665.png
>
>
> Current time-based flush policy always give a flush op a high score if we
> haven't flushed for the tablet in a long time, that may lead to starvation of
> ops that could free more memory.
> We set -flush_threshold_mb=32, -flush_threshold_secs=1800 in a cluster, and
> find that some small MRS/DMS flushes has a higher perf score than big MRS/DMS
> flushes and compactions, which seems not so reasonable.
> !image-2020-08-04-20-26-53-749.png|width=1424,height=317!!image-2020-08-04-20-28-00-665.png|width=1414,height=327!
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
